MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamic Influence Diagram-Based Deep Reinforcement Learning Framework and Application for Decision Support for Operators in Control Rooms

2023· article· en· W4386987648 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joseph Mietkiewicz, Ammar N. Abbas, Chidera Winifred Amazu, Anders L. Madsen, Gabriele Baldissone

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionCanadian Institute of Steel Construction
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceInfluence diagramReinforcementDiagramControl (management)Decision support systemArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionDecision treeEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's complex industrial environment, operators are often faced with challenging situations that require quick and accurate decision-making.The human-machine interface (HMI) can display too much information, leading to information overload and potentially compromising the operator's ability to respond effectively.To address this challenge, decision support models are needed to assist operators in identifying and responding to potential safety incidents.In this paper, we present an experiment to evaluate the effectiveness of a recommendation system in addressing the challenge of information overload.The case study focuses on a formaldehyde production simulator and examines the performance of an improved Human-Machine Interface (HMI) with the use of an AI-based recommendation system utilizing a dynamic influence diagram in conjunction with reinforcement learning.The preliminary results indicate the potential of these methods to aid operators in decision-making during challenging situations and enhance process safety in the industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207