Recognises user error given as a root cause
A person blamed, with no reason the error was possible.
Can AI do this?
People still lead Few or none of the tested AI models showed they master this. 0 of 4 models in the current benchmark master it.
| Model | Tier | Probability of mastery | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemini-4-argon | Flagship | 90% | Not shown |
| gemini-3.5-flash-lite | Low cost | 90% | Not shown |
| gpt-6-luna | Low cost | 90% | Not shown |
| claude-haiku-5-5 | Low cost | 90% | Not shown |
Mastered means a probability of at least 90% that the model has this knobit, estimated from its graded answers. “Not shown” means the answers do not settle it either way. How the models are tested.
What it looks like in practice
Expected result: The process or design that made the error possible
How it is assessed: Flags the deficient case and passes the acceptable one. Deficient: CA-002 "branch staff ticked the wrong box" for 37 DGS flags; action "retrain" Acceptable: The branch form defaults dgs_eligible to unticked for every account type
Also known as: "User error" with no process cause
Related knobits
Builds on
All 9 knobits of Analyse the root causes.
Source: Review checklist 05-root-cause-analysis, row 2 (8000-61 (process improvement); DMBOK)