MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729459572 · doi:10.1109/isorc.2017.25

ViDAQ: A Framework for Monitoring Human Machine Interfaces

2017· article· en· W2729459572 on OpenAlexaff
Harsh V.P. Singh, Qusay H. Mahmoud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituation awarenessScalabilityComputer scienceAutomationHuman–machine systemOperator (biology)Systems engineeringHuman–computer interactionEmbedded systemEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel case for visual data acquisition (ViDAQ) as an non-intrusive, scalable and reliable means of monitoring Human Machine Interfaces (HMIs) is envisioned. ViDAQ is a step towards achieving real-time cross-validation of human operator commands with respect to HMI states in large scale industrial control room environments. HMIs are integral in allowing human operators to safely command and monitor various critical processes, such as in nuclear power plants, commercial aviation, public transit vehicles, etc. However, HMI related perceptual dynamics presents a challenge to the designed safeguards against human-in-the-loop errors, which, ultimately is dependent on operator situational awareness. We envision, an expert supervisory framework for HMIs (EYE-on-HMI) utilizing ViDAQ, that is scalable and extensible to various industrial applications with prospective safety improvement to next generation commercial automation especially those with "driverless" operational modes. To this end, we present the design, implementation and evaluation of the ViDAQ to visually read rotary multi-dial meters herein.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.395 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207