Cited by 56Usability and User Interface DesignHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyData Visualization and Analytics

A Direct Manipulation Interface for Water-Based Rankine Cycle Heat Engines

Beltracchi, Leo·1987·IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics

Abstract

A concept for a direct manipulation interface to monitor and control water-based Rankine cycle heat engines is discussed and illustrated. The computer-driven interface utilizes measured plant data to form a model of the process. The model is presented in the form of an icon based upon the Rankine cycle. The icon is formed in terms of the temperature and entropy properties of water from various points within the Rankine cycle. In addition, real-time mimics of plant systems, which contain, control, and interact with the process, are presented within the same display format. The image displayed (on a cathode-ray tube) is designated a system-process iconic display of plant operations. An inference engine driven by plant data updates the display of plant segments which compose the iconic display. The iconic display serves as a visual knowledge base of plant operation as the interface is based on a model-world metaphor. A keyboard containing dedicated control keys serves as an interface to actuate control tasks allocated to human operators. A direct manipulation of the heat engine is achieved through the dedicated keys as the icon responds to plant reactions activated by the control tasks. The human operator evaluates the data presented in the system-process iconic display to determine if the goals of operation are being met. The workload imposed upon human operators to assess goals is minimized, making the human operator an effective supervisor of resources and also an active integrated member of plant operations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsmc.1987.4309064

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When the effects of nonsystematic errors were removed, perception was frequently superior to analytical thinking in terms of the empirical accuracy of judgements.

    “Moreover, when the effects of nonsystematic errors were removed, the results indicated that perception was frequently superior to analytical thinking in terms of the empirical accuracy of judgements.”

    From Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations (1992) · cites this paper as [37]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beltracchi, L.
Corresponding author
Beltracchi, Leo
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics
Published
1987
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
478-487
ISSN
0018-9472 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2073187503
Cited by
56
References
1
Citations by year
2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
Keywords
direct manipulation interfaces, Rankine cycle, inference engine, operator workload

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review