MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990686902 · doi:10.1177/1071181319631154

Designing for Situation Awareness in the Main Control Room of a Small Modular Reactor

2019· article· en· W2990686902 on OpenAlexaff
Maggie Kirkwood

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular designControl roomControl (management)Computer scienceHuman errorVirtual realityOperator (biology)Systems engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Human–computer interactionEngineeringArtificial intelligenceBusinessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nuclear industry is entering into a generation in which Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) could provide solutions to the worlds future energy needs. New technology and operations will be associated with new Human Factors (HF) design challenges. Operators may be faced with a higher cognitive workloads while monitoring several reactor units at once from a central main control room (MCR), or when monitoring units remotely. Automated processes may be implemented to mitigate human error, however may also result in a reduced sense of operator awareness in situations where operators fail to develop an accurate mental model of plant status. The present article highlights design recommendations that should be considered during the early stages of SMR MCR design to optimize human performance. Also discussed is the potential applications of eye tracking, and virtual reality (VR) to inform designers on best practices in display design and control room environments, respectively.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207