ML Proficiency Scoring for Adaptive Human-Machine Task Allocation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

There is ambiguity in how to assign tasks between humans and machines in collaborative projects, leading to inefficiencies in task division.

Innovation Solution

A computing system uses machine learning models to determine proficiency scores based on scenario characteristics and user performance metrics, adjusting task assignments dynamically to optimize user-system collaboration.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the machine performs all tasks in a collaborative process, then task completion reliability is improved, but system complexity and loss of human capability increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetask completion reliabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic task assignment that adapts based on user proficiency levels. The system transitions from static task allocation to dynamic adjustment, where the machine learns user capabilities over time and optimizes task distribution accordingly. This resolves the contradiction by making the system flexible rather than fixed, allowing reliability to improve through learning while avoiding excessive complexity through adaptive simplification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables users to serve themselves by learning their own proficiency patterns through machine learning models. The machine automatically assesses user capabilities and assigns tasks appropriately without requiring manual configuration or complex intervention protocols. This self-service approach improves reliability through consistent task assignment while keeping system complexity manageable through automated decision-making.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Manufacturing precision

If the machine provides extensive guidance and support, then user task completion accuracy is improved, but productivity decreases due to increased system intervention

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser task completion accuracyVSAvoidcollaborative process productivity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically changes the parameter of system intervention level based on user proficiency. Instead of providing constant extensive guidance, the machine learning model adjusts the amount and type of support provided according to the user's demonstrated capabilities. This resolves the contradiction by making guidance proportional to need, maintaining accuracy for novice users while maximizing productivity for proficient users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial action by providing guidance only when necessary based on user proficiency assessment. Rather than continuously intervening in all tasks, the machine learning model determines the optimal level of involvement, providing support only for tasks where the user demonstrates insufficient capability. This partial intervention maintains task completion accuracy while preserving overall productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Device complexity

If the system assigns tasks based on fixed rules, then system complexity is reduced, but adaptability to user proficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetask assignment system complexityVSAvoidadaptability to user proficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback loops where the machine learning model continuously monitors user performance and uses this information to improve future task assignments. The system learns from user outcomes and adjusts its behavior accordingly, enabling adaptability to individual user proficiencies. This feedback mechanism achieves high adaptability while maintaining manageable complexity through automated learning rather than manual rule configuration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary learning during an onboarding phase where users complete conditioning tasks to establish baseline proficiency levels. This preliminary action creates a foundation of user capability data that enables subsequent automated task assignment without requiring complex real-time analysis. The pre-collected data allows the system to adapt to user proficiency while keeping the operational system relatively simple.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Measurement precision

If the machine learns user proficiency through multiple iterations, then task assignment accuracy is improved, but time consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproficiency assessment accuracyVSAvoidtraining iteration time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary proficiency assessment through conditioning tasks during an initial onboarding phase. This preliminary learning establishes baseline user capabilities before actual collaborative work begins. By separating the learning phase from the production phase, the system achieves accurate proficiency measurement without significantly impacting the time available for actual project work.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial action by limiting the number of training iterations to a sufficient but not excessive amount. The machine learning model collects enough data to achieve adequate proficiency assessment accuracy, then transitions to using this knowledge for task assignment. This partial learning approach balances measurement precision with time constraints, avoiding unnecessary prolonged training while achieving sufficient accuracy for effective task allocation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS12572384B2Proficiency scoring for user-system collaboration
Publication Date: 2026.03.10 HEXAGON TECH CENT GMBH
  • US12572384B2 patent drawing
  • US12572384B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method executes, using a computing system, tasks of a collaborative process for iterations. The tasks include a user-system conditioning task. The method determines scenario characteristics and outcomes in response to executing the tasks for the iterations. The method generates a machine learning model using the scenario characteristics and the outcomes. The method inputs a scenario characteristic into the machine learning model. The method outputs a proficiency score from the machine learning model. The method adjusts the user-system conditioning task in response to the proficiency score. The method then executes, using the computing system, the collaborative process including the adjusted user-system conditioning task.