Analyzing Operator States and the Impact of AI-Enhanced Decision Support in Control Rooms: A Human-in-the-Loop Specialized Reinforcement Learning Framework for Intervention Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In complex industrial and chemical process control rooms, effective decision-making is crucial for safety and efficiency. The experiments in this paper evaluate the impact and applications of an AI-based decision support system integrated into an improved human-machine interface, using dynamic influence diagrams, a hidden Markov model, and deep reinforcement learning. The enhanced support system aims to reduce operator workload, improve situational awareness, and provide different intervention strategies to the operator adapted to the current state of both the system and human performance. Such a system can be particularly useful in cases of information overload when many alarms and inputs are presented all within the same time window, or for junior operators during training. A comprehensive cross-data analysis was conducted, involving 47 participants and a diverse range of data sources such as smartwatch metrics, eye-tracking data, process logs, and responses from questionnaires. The results indicate interesting insights regarding the effectiveness of the approach in aiding decision-making, decreasing perceived workload, and increasing situational awareness for the scenarios considered. Additionally, the results provide insights to compare differences between styles of information gathering when using the system by individual participants. These findings are particularly relevant when predicting the overall performance of the individual participant and their capacity to successfully handle a plant upset and the alarms connected to it using process and human-machine interaction logs in real-time which resulted in a 95.8% prediction accuracy using hidden Markov model. These predictions enable the development of more effective intervention strategies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".