MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098678458 · doi:10.1080/0951192x.2020.1836677

Prepared for work in Industry 4.0? Modelling the target activity system and five dimensions of worker readiness

2020· article· en· W3098678458 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Todd J. B. Blayone, Roland vanOostveen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)MainstreamKnowledge managementIndustry 4.0Human resourcesConstruct (python library)EngineeringEngineering managementBusinessComputer scienceProcess managementManagementPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within Industry 4.0 research, the spotlight shines on technological and organisational challenges. This study shifts the focus to worker readiness, beginning with an analysis of twenty-three models to establish the state of research. Findings demonstrate that existing models are mostly early-stage proposals addressing competences featured in mainstream 21st-century and digital-competence frameworks. Worker-level factors explicitly aligned with emerging cyber-physical systems receive little attention. To construct a worker-readiness model calibrated to the needs of Industry 4.0, the authors devised a research procedure based on a two-phase integrative review of 135 publications. Firstly, they deployed an activity-system apparatus to produce a structured description of the target environment. Secondly, major worker competence groupings, aligned with this target, were extracted, tagged and reduced to five dimensions. The resulting model consolidates prior research and introduces two original competence groupings addressing human-machine partnering and decision-making in Industry 4.0. This study is a foundational step by the Educational Informatics Lab, Ontario Tech University, Canada, toward deploying a global online profile tool for generating, analysing and aggregating worker readiness profiles. This cross-disciplinary project will help researchers, educators, corporate trainers, human resource managers, policymakers, and systems designers more effectively diagnose the readiness of workers for Industry 4.0.

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)0.004
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations51
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer Integrated ManufacturingSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207