MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382311532 · doi:10.60662/9y9e-yx04

Protocole expérimental visant l'étude de l’IA centrée sur l'humain dans le contexte de l'Industrie 5.0: Application en réalité augmentée

2023· preprint· fr· W4382311532 on OpenAlexaff
Laurent Joblot, Florian Magnani, Frédéric Rosin, Robert Pellerin

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industry 4.0's primary goal is generally to create a learning and agile enterprise, capable of adapting continuously to changing conditions through new technologies' utilization. However, the results of previous developments remain mitigated, mainly due to a primarily techno-centric approach. In contrast, the concept of Industry 5.0 is now defined as a human-centred approach, including social, societal, and environmental considerations. The evolution towards new models of agile organizations implies, in particular, greater autonomy for teams based on improved and accelerated decision-making. However, I4.0 technology's influence on the performance, motivation, engagement, and cognitive load of employees in a production setting remains largely under-researched. In this article, we present an experimental methodology to address this gap. We discuss its future application to a use case in which artificial intelligence (AI) and augmented reality (AR) are implemented to aid the operator in an error-detection manufacturing task. Finally, the methodological choices are elucidated, in preparation for the upcoming testing and operational implementation phases of the system. Results from the application of the experimental methodology will be used to identify the key factors contributing to the success and failure of AI and AR system design and implementation. Ultimately, we aim to understand how to promote positive outcomes for the employees using the system, in terms of performance, engagement, motivation, and autonomy.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.011

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207