The Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) is the world’s first x-ray free electron laser. It is a scientific user facility operated by the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, at Stanford, for the U.S. Department of Energy. As beam time at LCLS is extremely valuable and limited, experimental efficiency—getting the most high quality data in the least time—is critical. Our overall project employs cognitive engineering methodologies with the goal of improving experimental efficiency and increasing scientific productivity at LCLS by refining experimental interfaces and workflows, simplifying tasks, reducing errors, and improving operator safety and stress. Here, we describe a multi-agent, multi-scale computational cognitive interaction model of instrument operations at LCLS. Our model simulates the aspects of human cognition at multiple cognitive and temporal scales, ranging from seconds to hours, and among agents playing multiple roles, including instrument operator, real time data analyst, and experiment manager. The model can roughly predict impacts stemming from proposed changes to operational interfaces and workflows. Example results demonstrate the model’s potential in guiding modifications to improve operational efficiency. We discuss the implications of our effort for cognitive engineering in complex experimental settings and outline future directions for research. The model is open source, and the videos of the supplementary material provide extensive detail.

1.
See
https://lcls.slac.stanford.edu/overview
for an overview of LCLS; accessed
20 January 2025
.
2.
K. M.
Wilson
,
W. S.
Helton
, and
M. W.
Wiggins
, “
Cognitive engineering
,”
Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cognitive Sci.
4
(
1
),
17
31
(
2013
).
3.
Human-System Integration in the System Development Process: A New Look
, edited by
R. W.
Pew
and
A. S.
Mavor
(
National Research Council
,
Washington, DC
; The National Academies Press,
2007
).
4.
See
https://github.com/Jonathannsegal/lclshfe/
for the model code; accessed 20 January 2025; current commit ID: 685700a5b424f99554176133d5c26505cd396911
.
5.
See
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI13S4Z1cbXggy98pDXjqnVnnoekohF2f
for a YouTube-based copy of the supplementary videos; accessed
20 January 2025
.
6.

Although the XFEL and LCLS did not exist at the time, Traweek’s classic ethnography of SLAC10 provides an excellent, if somewhat outdated, depiction of the linac, of the scientists and engineers that built and operate it (esp. pp. 37–39), and of the “detectors” in use at that time (pp. 48–51 and 71–72).

7.
See
https://lcls.slac.stanford.edu/instruments/cxi
for a description of the LCLS CXI instrument; accessed
20 January 2025
.
8.
F. E.
Ritter
, Usability method projects for improving studies at the linac coherent light source,
2022
.
9.
See
https://lcls.slac.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/2023-10/LCLS_Run20_Schedule-v11.pdf
for the complete run 20 schedule; accessed
20 January 2025
.
10.
S.
Traweek
,
Beamtimes and Lifetimes. The World of High-Energy Physicists
(
Harvard University Press
,
Cambridge, MA
,
1988
).
11.
J.
Thayer
et al.
Data systems for the Linac coherent light source
,”
Adv. Struct. Chem.
Imaging
3
(2017), see https://ascimaging.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40679-016-0037-7.
12.
See
https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/LCLSIIData/ami
for an overview of the AMI; accessed
20 January 2025
.
13.
B.
Hayes-Roth
, “
An architecture for adaptive intelligent systems
,”
Artif. Intell.
72
(
1–2
),
329
365
(
1995
).
14.
A. C.
Graesser
,
S. M.
Fiore
,
S.
Greiff
,
J.
Andrews-Todd
,
P. W.
Foltz
, and
F. W.
Hesse
, “
Advancing the science of collaborative problem solving
,”
Psychol. Sci. Public Interest
19
(
2
),
59
92
(
2018
).
15.
S. G.
Hutchins
and
T.
Kendall
, “
The role of cognition in team collaboration during complex problem solving
,” in
Informed by Knowledge
, edited by
K. L.
Mosier
and
U. M.
Fischer
(
Psychology Press
,
New York
,
2010
).
16.
D.
Norman
,
The Psychology of Everyday Things
(
Basic Books
,
New York
,
1988
).
17.
J.
Shrager
, “
Demandance
,” arXiv:1507.01882 (
2015
).
18.
E.
Hutchins
,
N.
Weibel
,
C.
Emmenegger
,
A.
Fouse
, and
B.
Holder
, “
An integrative approach to understanding flight crew activity
,”
J. Cognitive Eng. Decis. Making
7
(
4
),
353
376
(
2013
).
19.
E.
Hutchins
, “
The technology of team navigation
,” in
Intellectual Teamwork
, edited by
J.
Galegher
,
R. E.
Kraut
, and
C.
Egido
(
Psychology Press
,
1990
), pp.
191
220
.
20.
See
http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/publication/
for an index of ACT-R publications; accessed
20 January 2025
.
21.
M.
Matessa
, “
Interactive models of collaborative communication
,” in
Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society
(
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
,
Hillsdale, NJ
,
2001
), pp.
634
638
.
22.
R. L.
Goldstone
and
M. A.
Janssen
, “
Computational models of collective behavior
,”
Trends Cognit. Sci.
9
(
9
),
424
430
(
2005
).
23.
N.
Cooke
and
C.
Myers
,
Cognitive Coordination on the Network Centric Battlefield
(
Cognitive Engineering Research Institute
,
Mesa, AZ
,
2009
).
24.
J.
Ball
,
C.
Myers
,
A.
Heiberg
,
N. J.
Cooke
,
M.
Matessa
,
M.
Freiman
, and
S.
Rodgers
, “
The synthetic teammate project
,”
Comput. Math. Organ. Theory
16
,
271
299
(
2010
).
25.
J.
Shrager
and
P.
Langley
,
Computational Models of Scientific Discovery and Theory Formation
(
Morgan Kaufmann
,
San Mateo, CA
,
1990
).
You do not currently have access to this content.