AI System for Preparing a Calibration Review Queue

The problem

When instrument records, certificates, usage data and downtime plans are held in separate sources, their fields must be matched by hand before a calibration review queue can be prepared.

The metrology manager must compare every suggestion in the calibration review queue with its source record; missing or conflicting evidence must not replace the final decision.

If the availability of a spare instrument or an out-of-service status is not set aside for review, an instrument with invalid calibration could be used or an instrument could be blocked prematurely; the record must not proceed without a human decision.

What we set out to improve

• Time taken for a draft calibration review queue and its supporting evidence to reach the metrology manager for review
• How records set aside for human review because a spare instrument is available or an instrument is out of service are resolved
• Number of suggestions corrected after identifying a risk that an instrument with invalid calibration could be used or blocked prematurely

How the system works

1. 01 Retrieve the instrument record, certificate, usage data and downtime plan from permitted sources using the record identifier
2. 02 Link source, date and version information to the shared work record
3. 03 Validate fields and units
4. 04 Prepare the calibration review queue with its supporting evidence
5. 05 Check for an exception: a spare instrument is available or an instrument is out of service
6. 06 Have the metrology manager accept, revise or reject the suggestion
7. 07 Record the approved decision and its source in the processing log

Methods we used

• A source-identified common data schema for the instrument record, certificate, usage data and downtime plan
• A decision structure that separates deterministic rules from AI suggestions
• A review screen showing the calibration review queue alongside the underlying source evidence
• A mandatory human review queue when a spare instrument is available or an instrument is out of service
• An event identifier that prevents duplicate processing

Where people stay involved

Data and security

Only the fields required for this decision should be processed from the instrument record, certificate, usage data and downtime plan. Access to the source systems must be authorised separately from the metrology manager role, and personal data, commercial information and technical secrets must not be passed into the model context unnecessarily. Reading, suggestions and human decisions must be logged separately.

Who this suits

Frequently asked questions