MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386971074 · doi:10.1115/omae2023-101455

Challenges of the Digital Transformation for Shipping: Human-Centered Design for Marine Navigation Systems

2023· article· en· W4386971074 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Christopher Soper, Jennifer Smith, Thomas Browne, Brian Veitch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsCommunity Sector Council Newfoundland and LabradorMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceRelation (database)Digital transformationEngineeringConstruction engineeringSystems engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Transport engineeringBusinessWorld Wide WebGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The digital transformation of the marine industry presents opportunities and challenges for engineers, designers, and seafarers alike. These challenges are specifically acute in the context of the Arctic, where the presence of sea ice, severe metocean conditions, and limitations to modern charting and navigational aids present increased navigational challenges. Integration and further development of digital bridge tools can improve safety, but must take into account human factors concerns by drawing from literature and case studies where the human-machine interaction has broken down, leading to incidents. In this paper, the challenges of using digital bridge tools to support safe Arctic navigation are discussed as they relate to safe human-machine interaction. A case study of a passenger ship grounding in the Canadian Arctic is presented to demonstrate how failures in bridge equipment design and operation can contribute to accidents. This case study is discussed in relation to literature on human factors engineering and compared to other incidents where human factors was listed as a potential cause. These findings can be used to inform designers of marine navigation systems of the best practices to be aware of when implementing new technologies on the bridge of ships. Additionally, the implications of these findings on autonomous ship development and operation are discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.333
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.073 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207