MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902661537 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.2596796

Geared Decisions: Experimenting with Decision Support Visualizations

2019· article· en· W2902661537 on OpenAlexaff
Milena Radzikowska, Stan Ruecker, Walter F. Bischof, Michelle Annett, Fraser Forbes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDecision support systemHuman–computer interactionProcess managementData scienceBusinessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human-Machine Interfaces (HMI) are used where people and machines or systems (often within an industrial context) interact during a given task. The goal of this interaction is for the user to operate and control the machine in an effective manner, while receiving helpful and timely feedback. In some contexts, an HMI may also function as a decision support system (DSS), or include DSS components, aiding users in making effective decisions about some aspect of the industrial operation. In this paper, we discuss the iterative design of an HMI–DSS based on a mathematical model for an ice- cream manufacturing operation. We chose ice-cream manufacturing as a working example because it is a multi-modal system, containing sufficient process complexity to be generalizable to many other kinds of industrial operations. One of our design goals is to provide users with a display that includes both quantitative and qualitative information types related to the situation requiring a decision. In addition, we aim to provide users with an exploratory environment that enables them to experiment with decision alternatives, their past and potential consequences, prior to actually carrying out the decision.

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)0.001
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 score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207