Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘taxonomies

Tidbits and notes posted on FB and Twitter. Part 182

Note: I take notes of books I read and comment on events and edit sentences that fit my style. I pa attention to researched documentaries and serious links I receive. The page is long and growing like crazy, and the sections I post contains a month-old events that are worth refreshing your memory.

Documentary: Nero didn’t burn Rome. He didn’t persecute the Christians. St Peter didn’t die during Nero time. No foreign military expansions were conducted. Nero was an artist and didn’t appreciate the cruelties of the elite senators.  He surrendered himself with ministers from sons of freed slaves and built wonderful achievements. He did assassinate his mother Agrippa for fear of dethroning him. And he did assassinate his ex-wife Octavia.

What taxonomies Human Factors have to conceive?  How about the classification of human errors when operating a system, their frequencies and consequences on the safety of operators and system performance?

One alternative classification of human errors is based on human behavior and the level of comprehension. Mainly, skill-based, or rule-based or knowledge-based behavioral patterns. This taxonomy identifies 13 types of errors and discriminates among the stages and strength of controlled routines in the mind that precipitate the occurrence of an error, whether during execution of a task, omitting steps, changing the order of steps, sequence of steps, timing errors, inadequate analysis or decision-making.

Another taxonomy rely on the theory of information processing and it is a literal transcription of the experimental processes; mainly, observation of a system status, choice of hypothesis, testing of hypothesis, choice of goal, choice of procedure and execution of procedure.  Basically, this taxonomy may answer the problems in the rule-based and knowledge–based behavior.

It is useful to specify in the final steps of taxonomy whether an error is of omission or of commission.  I suggest that the errors of commission be also fine tuned to differentiate among errors of sequence, the kind of sequence, and timing of the execution.

There are alternative strategies for reducing human errors by either training, selection of the appropriate applicants, or redesigning a system to fit the capabilities of end users and/or taking care of his limitations by preventive designs, exclusion designs, and fail-safe designs.

I now take one task at a time. Now that time is worth everything, Time is irrelevant to me. I could be happy.

In my mind, “geek” and “nerd” are related, but capture different dimensions of an intense dedication to a subject. The distinction is that geeks are fans of their subjects, and nerds are practitioners of their fields of interest.

  • geek – An enthusiast of a particular topic or field. Geeks are “collection” oriented, gathering facts and mementos related to their subject of interest. They are obsessed with the newest, coolest, trendiest things that their subject has to offer.
  • nerd – A studious intellectual of a particular topic or field. Nerds are “achievement” oriented, and focus their efforts on acquiring knowledge and skill over trivia and memorabilia.

Then I learned of the double standards since my tacit demotion is that we must keep at work the details of moral standards accepted at work, and never transfer it outside the premises. This attitude is categorized under State Secret interests… Home moral standards are off-limits in the active function.

Nabih Berry, chairman of Parliament, khosser. 3amaarat al khorafaat 7awla shakhsihi inharat. reje3 la noktet al bidayat. Za3eem militia: ya ana al mou2assassat yamma al fawdat

Ra7 yedfa3 kteer Nabih lamma zarak Hezbollah. dha3dha3 misdakiyyat sayyed al mokawamat bi binaa2 dawlat mou2assassat wa al doustour

Kallam jameel la Jobran Bassil min Paris lel al mo2tamar wa fil Magazine. Al ghawghaa2 ajbaret Cote d’Ivoire ma te2der t2ammen 7imayyah la Jobran

Sa3d Hariri PM karrar yebneh dawleh: mosh kel siyassi bi mohemmeh la barrat laazem 2albo yo2bot.

Kel 3ayleh badda toshnok al kaatel bi doun mou7akamat. Al amen lazem ye jor ha2oula2 lel mou7akamat, abel Hisham.

Fi ehmaal bi 3akaar, B3albak, Hermel? Nouwaab wa wouzara2 hal moukata3aat ba baddon ya3mlo investment wa business bi manate2on

“Talk About Cyclists as you would talk about Road users”: Freshest concerns

After cycling deaths and serious accidents it’s common to see people talking about red light jumping, pavement cycling and so on – and yet this rarely happens when pedestrians get knocked over or there are multiple car pile-ups. So we wondered: what would it be like if we talked about everyone else the way we talk about cyclists?

Rachel Holdsworth posted this Nov. 14, 2013 on the Londonist

If We Talked About All Road Users The Way We Talk About Cyclists

“I know the woman crossing the road was in my blind spot, but if she’d been wearing a high-vis jacket I’d have seen her – in my blind spot.”

“I nearly got knocked over by a bus on a zebra crossing once. It was a dual carriageway, the van in the lane nearest to me had stopped but this bus went sailing through and missed me by inches. This actually happened.

I now hate all buses and think they shouldn’t be allowed on the road.”

traffic_141113

Photo by Homemade from the Londonist Flickr pool

“If the pushchair didn’t have lights on, then I’m not surprised it got hit. What? Yes, even at 2pm.”

“I’ve got no sympathy for the little old man knocked down at the crossing. If he wasn’t wearing a helmet he should take what’s coming to him.”

“I see buses jump red lights all the time. Just look on YouTube, there’s loads of videos. Therefore all bus accidents are the fault of buses jumping red lights. I bet all the buses that hit people in London (one a day) jumped red lights. Bastards.”

“1.2m drivers don’t have insurance. I think police should wait at big junctions to check all drivers’ documents.”

“Did you hear about that horrific accident? Where the car ended up under a low loader and the driver was killed? Bet he was texting when it happened.”

“Bloody mobility scooter on the pavement! Get on the road where you’re not a danger to pedestrians!”

“Bloody mobility scooter on the road! Get on the pavement where you’re not a danger to motorists!”

It’s almost as if road users are individuals who sometimes do stupid things but can’t be held representative of that entire transport mode. Perhaps we should just concentrate on making infrastructure safer for all vulnerable road users.

Hannah Padgett wrote:

“If you look at taxonomies of car–bicycle collisions or car–motorcycle collisions, which tend to be very similar, you see that the majority of collisions happen in just a few circumstances.

One of the key circumstances is: the rider is going straight along a main road and are hit by a driver turning right (in the UK), either into a side street or out of one.

There’s actually a (very) small psychological literature on this, particularly the ‘looked-but-failed-to-see phenomenon’, which is where the right- turning driver looks at the rider but does not consciously become aware of the hazard.

Unfortunately, this literature is so small it doesn’t provide very hard answers, but it’s likely the problem is drivers’ expectations, making it a top- down processing problem.

The hypothesis is that drivers don’t expect to encounter cyclists at junctions and so their visual search patterns go to the parts of the road where cars and trucks are to be found, skipping the parts of the road where cyclists (and, to an extent, motorcyclists) are found.”

Email Boris Johnson NOW to prevent more deaths petition.lcc.org.uk
Ultra Shocking Video about Lorry Blind-Spots. dutchbikeguy.wordpress.com
TfL (Transport for London) have made a video showing just how blind lorry drivers are in some circumstances.
This is great evidence for the argument that heavy-goods vehicles and bikes shouldn’t ha…

Article #12, April 9, 2005

“What are the error taxonomies in Human Factors?”

There is a tendency to separate errors made by human and those done by machines as if any man made equipment, product, or system has not been designed, tested, evaluated, manufactured, distributed, or operated by a human.  My point is any errors committed by using or operating an artificial implement that causes injuries is ultimately a human errors. 

How Human Factors classifies errors when people operate systems, and what are the types of errors, their frequencies and consequences on the health and safety of operators and systems’ performance?  Human Factors professionals attempted to establish various error taxonomies, some within specific contexts such as nuclear power plants and chemical installations, of deficiencies in design and operation that might be committed, and others that are general in nature and restricted to processes of the mind and the limitations of human capabilities. One alternative classification of human errors is based on human behavior and the level of comprehension; mainly skill-based, rule-based, or knowledge-based behavioral patterns. For example, Rasmussen (1982) developed a decision flow diagram that identifies 13 types of errors; this taxonomy identifies two kinds of errors attributable to skill based behavior such as acts relevant to manual variability or topographic misorientation, four major errors related to rule based behavior such as stereotype takeover, forgetting isolated acts, mistakes alternatives, and other slip of memory, and then seven types of errors that can be attached to knowledge based behavior such as familiar association short cut, information not seen or sought, information assumed but not observed, information misinterpreted, and side effects or conditions not adequately considered. 

These types of errors are the products of activities done in routine situations or when the situation deviates from normal routine and discriminate among the stages and strength of controlled routines in the mind that precipitate the occurrence of an error whether during executing of a task, omitting steps, changing the order of steps, sequence of steps, timing errors, inadequate analysis or decision making.  With a strong knowledge of the behavior of a system, provided that the mental model is not deficient, then applying the rules consistently most of the errors will be concentrated on the level of skill achieved in performing a job.

Another taxonomy rely on the theory of information processing and it is somehow a literal transcription of the experimental processes; mainly observation of the status of a system, choice of hypothesis, testing of hypothesis, choice of goal, choice of procedure and execution of procedure.  Basically, this taxonomy may answer the problems in the rule-based and knowledge–based behavior.

Another alternative taxonomy could be found in measurement errors considered in statistical research such as conceptual, consistent or random errors. Conceptual errors are committed when a proxy is used instead of the variable of interest either because of lack of knowledge of how to measure the latter (i.e., measuring vocabulary ability when mental ability is the object of the research) or because it is less expensive or more convenient.

Consistent errors are represented by systematic errors from respondents whether conscious or not, measuring instruments, research settings, interviewers, raters, and researchers. Consistent errors affect the validity of measures.

Random errors occur as a result of temporary fluctuations in respondents, raters, etc.  Random errors affect the reliability of the measures.

The effects of these measurement errors have different consequences whether committed relative to the dependent or independent variables. It would be interesting to find correspondence among the various error taxonomies as well as assigning every error to either a conscious, predetermined tendency along with the real reasons underlining these errors, or unconscious errors.

It is useful to specify in the final steps of taxonomy whether an error is of omission or of commission.  I suggest that the errors of commission be also fine tuned to differentiate among errors of sequence, the kind of sequence and timing of the execution.

There are alternative strategies for reducing human errors by either training, selection of the appropriate applicants or redesigning a system to fit the capabilities of end users and or taking care of his limitations by preventive designs, exclusion designs and fail-safe designs.

Article #11, April 9, 2005

“What kind of methods will I have to manipulate in HF?”

Once again you are asking a most interesting and to the point question.

Usually, my class is composed of all engineering disciplines and is basically a required course for industrial engineers in their third year.

Every time I ask the students: “Tell me, what 3 main methods you use in your discipline?” 

I enjoy contemplating the glazed looks on their eyes.

For them, one method to using in a discipline is logically a reasonable supposition because somehow they must have been applying some sort of a method anyhow.

Hearing that there may be more than one methods that they have been applying explicitly without realizing it propelled my university students into a state of shock and disbelief.

 If I asked them how they solved their problems their immediate reaction is: “Well, we locate the appropriate equation, we input the necessary data then we whip the calculator and get the response.”

Do they know before hand the magnitude and range of the reasonable answers?

Do they ever double check whether the answer is within the acceptable range for the specific domain of the problem? 

Do they make it a habit to at least attach a unit to their answer?

Do they double check whether the algebraic manipulation of the dimensions of the independent variables in the equation matches the dimension of the dependent variable?  Do they solve algebraically the equation before inputting data only in the last phase of the transformation?

The average graduate student has no recollection that his training induced him to apply methodically this process for applying algebra, considering the dimensionality of an equation or the range and domain of the problems at hand.

The average university student has barely been prompted to think about the taxonomy (classification scheme) of methods used in engineering and asked to locate the appropriate domain of methods that his course might require.

Every science is based on a set of taxonomies or classification schemes.

For example we are taught that mathematic is based on inductive and deductive reasoning, that it has several distinct branches like analytic, algebraic, numeric, geometric and not least probabilistic.

Every applied science has gone through the methodologies of experimenting, setting the protocol, collecting data, analyzing statistically the data and hopefully reaching a few practical results that the professionals in the disciplines could apply.

Fourth year engineering university graduates go through their final project with a set of inefficient experiments, each experiment being based on a unique independent variable or factor and probably a modicum of control variables, and they live happily ever after without knowing that there are courses that train you to design experiments in very efficient ways.  They graduate without being required to taking at least one course in designing cause and effect experiments where more than one factor and more than one dependent variable could be studied simultaneously for the more useful information on the interactions among the variables.  It does not matter how often I explain to them the various kind of variables through specific examples, the fact is their brain is not trained to look at problems from an experimental perspective.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

October 2020
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 1,427,871 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 775 other followers

%d bloggers like this: