## 4 Results
### Anomaly Resolution during the Forming Process
#### 4.3.2 Anomaly Detection, Diagnosis, Problem Solving and Resolution  
During the regular process monitoring, the operator team detected five anomalies. Based on the interview data, the problem solving process was analyzed for all identified anomalies according to the developed cognition-based framework. Hence, the responses of the three operators to the interview questions (see Section 3.3) were categorized by information detection and state-goal-comparison, which is part of the regular process monitoring; identification of causes and expertise alignment, which is part of the anomaly detection and diagnosis; and individual generation of action alternatives, joint team evaluation, and choice of action, which is part of the problem solving and resolution process (see Table 3). There were no inconsistent statements between the operators regarding the anomalies and categories. However, in some cases, information was only reported by one or two operators; therefore, only aggregated data were reported. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sub-Task**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**AOI**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Gaze Proportions in \%**} \\ \cline{3-5}  & & **Operator 1** & **Operator 2** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Kinematic configuration} & Work piece & 12.2 & 30.8 \\  & Machine tool & 66.3 & 35.0 \\  & Clamping device & 15.2 & 9.6 \\  & Operator 1 & - & 19.8 \\  & Operator 2 & 2.7 & - \\  & Operator 3 & 3.0 & 1.1 \\  & Robot & 0.6 & 3.7 \\  & Work table & - & - \\  & Control panel & - & - \\  & Documentation & - & - \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Empty run (1 st time)} & Work piece & - & - \\  & Machine tool & 28.6 & 6.1 \\  & Clamping device & 34.1 & 41.4 \\  & Operator 1 & - & 4.0 \\  & Operator 2 & 1.5 & - \\  & Operator 3 & 0.5 & 0.9 \\  & Robot & 0.8 & 0.6 \\  & Work table & 30.9 & 40.9 \\  & Control panel & 3.6 & - \\  & Documentation & - & 1.2 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Empty run (2 nd time)} & Work piece & - & - \\  & Machine tool & 30.0 & 12.5 \\  & Clamping device & 24.6 & 23.5 \\  & Operator 1 & 8.3 & 32.6 \\  & Operator 2 & - & - \\  & Operator 3 & - & - \\  & Robot & 3.0 & 3.2 \\  & Work table & 33.6 & 28.2 \\  & Control panel & 0.5 & - \\  & Documentation & - & - \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Forming the work piece} & Work piece & 8.8 & 25.2 \\  & Machine tool & 35.0 & 21.3 \\  & Clamping device & 40.7 & 30.8 \\  & Operator 1 & - & 10.5 \\  & Operator 2 & 9.6 & - \\  & Operator 3 & 0.2 & - \\  & Robot & 5.7 & 4.1 \\  & Work table & - & 0.9 \\  & Control panel & - & - \\  & Documentation & - & 5.5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Gaze proportions to relevant AOIs in percent for operator 1 and 2 dependent on analyzed sub-tasks. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Regular Process Monitoring** & **Anomaly Detection and Diagnosis** & **Problem Solving and Resolution** \\ \hline (1) Anomaly regarding trajectory of the machine tool/robot & (sub-task: kinematic configuration) & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Information Detection} & Identification of Causes & Individual Generation of Action \\  & \(\bullet\) & Operator 1: Deviation due to & Alternatives \\  & \(\bullet\) & incorrect cutting of the work piece & \\ \(\bullet\) & Supervision and control whether the & or due to incorrect analytical & \(\bullet\) & Operator 1: Analysis and adjustment \\  & size of the gap between the work & definition/control data  
The first anomaly was detected during the sub-task 2 \"kinematic configuration\". Operator 1 detected a deviation from the ideal trajectory and notified the other operators, with the operators then gathering possible reasons for the deviation. According to operator 1, the deviation could be due to an incorrect cutting of the work piece or incorrect definition of control data. According to operators 2 and 3, the deviation could be due to a false fixation of the work piece into the clamping device as a result of a measurement error. The operators reported that the expertise for solving the problem in the long-term lies within the areas of operators 2 and 3.