feat(methodologies): add task, error, interaction, and variability analysis - #1
Open
raphaelmarra wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
feat(methodologies): add task, error, interaction, and variability analysis#1raphaelmarra wants to merge 1 commit into
raphaelmarra wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Task analysis currently appears as a generic entry, leaving the choice between task structure, expert cognition, error prediction, interaction timing, and functional variability underspecified.
Add actionable canonical cards for HTA, CTA, SHERPA, GOMS/KLM, and FRAM. Keep HTA/CTA/SHERPA in human factors, GOMS/KLM in UX, and FRAM in safety/systems; connect training and interface uses through explicit routing. Each card states prerequisites, procedure, outputs, failure modes, source consultation, and evidence limits. Add optional compositions, selection scenarios, and an ownership ADR.
The cards distinguish ordinal error judgments from calibrated probabilities, modeled practiced execution from learning or measured outcomes, and potential functional couplings from event instantiations. They do not claim that a model or worksheet proves safety or effectiveness.
Validation:
python tools/validate_repository.pypassed for all 39 catalogs;git diff --checkpassed. Native skill validation, local links/anchors, distribution fragments, and fresh Codex skill discovery passed. Selection scenarios define future behavioral evaluation expectations; no model benchmark or participant study was executed.