Development and Usability Evaluation of VulcanH, a CMMS Prototype for Preventive and Predictive Maintenance of Mobile Mining Equipment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper details the design, development, and evaluation of VulcanH, a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) specialized in preventive maintenance (PM) and predictive maintenance (PdM) management for underground mobile mining equipment. Further, it aims to expand knowledge on trust in automation (TiA) for PdM as well as contribute to the literature on explainability requirements of a PdM-capable artificial intelligence (AI). This study adopted an empirical approach through the execution of user tests with nine maintenance experts from five East-Canadian mines and implemented the User Experience Questionnaire Plus (UEQ+) and the Reliance Intentions Scale (RIS) to evaluate usability and TiA, respectively. It was found that the usability and efficiency of VulcanH were satisfactory for expert users and encouraged the gradual transition from PM to PdM practices. Quantitative and qualitative results documented participants’ willingness to rely on PdM predictions as long as suitable explanations are provided. Graphical explanations covering the full spectrum of the derived data were preferred. Due to the prototypical nature of VulcanH, certain relevant aspects of maintenance planning were not considered. Researchers are encouraged to include these notions in the evaluation of future CMMS proposals. This paper suggests a harmonious integration of both preventive and predictive maintenance practices in the mining industry. It may also guide future research in PdM to select an analytical algorithm capable of supplying adequate and causal justifications for informed decision making. This study fulfills an identified need to adopt a user-centered approach in the development of CMMSs in the mining industry. Hence, both researchers and industry stakeholders may benefit from the findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".