MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772409143 · doi:10.1109/smc.2017.8123061

HMI-guard: A platform for detecting errors in human-machine interfaces

2017· article· en· W2772409143 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
KeywordsDowntimeComputer scienceHuman errorHuman–machine systemALARMGuard (computer science)Embedded systemAutomotive industryReal-time computingReliability engineeringOperating systemEngineeringHuman–computer interactionElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The HMI-Guard platform opens up a non-intrusive means of guarding against human errors that are introduced by Human-in-the-loop (HITL) interaction via the Human Machine Interfaces (HMIs). Motivation for this framework is partly in response to prevalence of legacy HMI devices (E.g. meters, rotary dials, gauges, alarm indicators, etc.) in industrial control room environments such as in nuclear power plants, aviation and automotive industry that must be manually monitored by trained operators. Alternatively, real-time monitoring of legacy HMI devices requires digital data acquisition which, may require expensive retrofits, design changes and cause production downtime. Moreover, severity of accidents caused due to operator error in manually reading these devices can be reduced if HITL errors are promptly discovered, trended and intervened upon.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.358 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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