Will AI replace Laboratory technicians?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 170 official task statements scored for Laboratory technicians (United Kingdom, SOC 3111), 17% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 27 out of 100 (range 22–32, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

Which tasks in “Laboratory technicians” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare graphs or charts to document experimental results” (93/100, very high); “Enter data into computers for use in analyses or reports” (93/100, very high); “Compile and produce graphs on computers for specialist and general users” (83/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.

Which tasks in “Laboratory technicians” stay human?

About 71% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Inoculate fertilised eggs, broths, or other bacteriological media with organisms” (0/100, minimal); “Freeze tissue specimens” (0/100, minimal); “Embed tissue specimens into paraffin wax blocks” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.

What should someone working in “Laboratory technicians” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 17% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 71% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

How is the AI exposure score for Laboratory technicians calculated?

Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 170 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

UK dataswitch to US

Laboratory technicians

monitoring personnel for radiation exposure levels, keeping traceability records as part of process documentation and analysing hygiene data and interpreting results to identify trends. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: compiling laboratory test results for analysis. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 17%
changing shape: 12%
staying human: 71%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 27 out of 100 (22–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 170 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for laboratory technicians is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment, stays yours. New tools, same person answering for it.

Your week, as this page understands it

Laboratory technicians carry out routine laboratory tests and checks and perform a variety of technical support functions requiring the application of established or prescribed procedures and techniques to assist scientists with their research, development, analysis and testing, and to verify the physical, chemical and other characteristics of materials and products. The job title says “laboratory technicians”. The real job is the part underneath: maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But laboratory technicians is not one task. It is 170 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 17%
changing shape: 12%
staying human: 71%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

4 rows are marked low confidence, so treat them as a ballpark rather than a fine measurement.
30 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

28 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Compiling laboratory test results for analysis
This is reading one thing and writing another: laboratory test results in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 90 · 3111/01, 3111/02, 3111/04
Source: “Compile laboratory test results for analysis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (74–88 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Pulling test results together into one dataset is routine data handling that software already does very well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing programmes of sampling and analysis for quality standards
This is reading one thing and writing another: programmes in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Develop programmes of sampling and analysis for quality standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Sampling and analysis plans follow published standards, so software can draft them, with a specialist checking local details.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Interpreting compiled test results
This is reading one thing and writing another: compiled test results in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Interpret compiled test results.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reading patterns in a table of results suits software, though a scientist still confirms the conclusions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Writing technical reports on laboratory experiments to record results and conclusions
This is reading one thing and writing another: technical reports in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Write technical reports on laboratory experiments to record results and conclusions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Software drafts the report well once results exist, but the scientist's own judgement shapes the conclusions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

22 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Creating experimental formulas for chemical solutions
The software now makes the first pass at experimental formulas, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 65 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Create experimental formulas for chemical solutions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (31–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Software can propose formulations from published chemistry, but they still have to be tried and refined in the lab.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring personnel for radiation exposure levels
The software now makes the first pass at personnel, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 95 · 3111/03
Source: “Monitor personnel for radiation exposure levels.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Dose records are digital and easy to track, but radiation rules require an approved dosimetry service and a named radiation supervisor in the loop.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing and interpreting test data to ensure radiation safety
The software now makes the first pass at test data, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 90 · 3111/03
Source: “Analyse and interpret test data to ensure radiation safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Analysing dose data is desk work software supports, but radiation safety conclusions need a qualified adviser.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

120 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/01, 3111/02, 3111/05
Source: “Maintain and repair laboratory equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Repairing apparatus needs hands and tools on the equipment itself.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting safety audits, including radiation work, by inspecting facilities and reviewing documentation
This work happens in the physical world: safety audits, including radiation work, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/01, 3111/02, 3111/03
Source: “Conduct safety audits, including radiation work, by inspecting facilities and reviewing documentation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Auditing means walking the facility as well as reading paperwork, and radiation work needs a qualified adviser.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Training newly hired laboratory staff
This work happens in the physical world: hired laboratory staff, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/01, 3111/02, 3111/04
Source: “Train newly hired laboratory staff.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: New technicians learn by being shown techniques at the bench by an experienced colleague.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 160 tasks

Preparing graphs or charts to document experimental results
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: graphs in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Prepare graphs or charts to document experimental results.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Turning experiment data into clear graphs is something software does quickly and to a high standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Entering data into computers for use in analyses or reports
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3111/03, 3111/05
Source: “Enter data into computers for use in analyses or reports.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Getting data into a system is routine work already largely automated.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Compiling and producing graphs on computers for specialist and general users
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: graphs in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 3111/02
Source: “Compile and produce graphs on computers for specialist and general users.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Producing graphs on a computer is one of the most routine things software does, for any audience.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Conducting research on specific topics
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: research in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3111/02
Source: “Conduct research on specific topics.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Researching a topic means reading and pulling together published material, one of the things software does best.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Filling in digital or paper-based process documentation
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: digital in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3111/01
Source: “Fill in digital or paper-based process documentation, including process and production records.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Filling in process records is routine data entry that software handles at least as well as a person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Keeping traceability records as part of process documentation
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: traceability records in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3111/01
Source: “Keep traceability records as part of process documentation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Keeping traceability records is structured record-keeping that software manages very reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recording results for presentation to senior colleagues
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: results in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 3111/02
Source: “Record results for presentation to senior colleagues.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Recording results for colleagues is straightforward data handling software does reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining accurate records
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: accurate records in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/04
Source: “Maintain accurate records.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Keeping records accurate is routine screen work software does reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing hygiene data and interpreting results to identify trends
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: hygiene data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Analyse hygiene data and interpret results to identify trends.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Spotting trends in hygiene results is straightforward data analysis on numbers already collected.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ordering materials for the laboratory to support scientific experiments
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: materials in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3111/04
Source: “Order materials for the laboratory to support scientific experiments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Ordering lab materials is routine purchasing software handles, though someone confirms what the work actually needs.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing, and applying thing latest scientific research and clinical data for the focus drug or device
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: latest scientific research in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 50 · 3111/05
Source: “Analyse and apply the latest scientific research and clinical data for the focus drug or device.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 72 out of 100 (68–76 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reading and summarising published research and clinical data is one of software's strongest areas.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Maintaining records of radiological and environmental conditions
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: records of radiological in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 3111/03
Source: “Maintain records of radiological and environmental conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (62–76 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Maintaining records of conditions is structured record-keeping software does very reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Completing quality records documentation to maintain laboratory standards
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: quality records documentation in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/01
Source: “Complete quality records documentation to maintain laboratory standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Filling in quality records is standard paperwork software drafts well, though a responsible person still signs it off.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing data from contract laboratories to ensure accuracy and regulatory compliance
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3111/03
Source: “Review data from contract laboratories to ensure accuracy and regulatory compliance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Checking another lab's data against the rules is desk work with clear criteria, which software does well before a senior colleague confirms it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing and interpreting test data to ensure food safety and quality
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: test data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/04
Source: “Analyse and interpret test data to ensure food safety and quality.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Interpreting test results against food standards is desk analysis software supports, with a qualified person confirming.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining accurate records of laboratory work and results
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: accurate records of laboratory work in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 3111/04
Source: “Maintain accurate records of laboratory work and results.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Laboratory records are already digital and software organises results reliably, though the entries must reflect what actually happened at the bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ordering laboratory analyses of patients' blood or cerebrospinal fluid
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: laboratory analyses of patients' blood in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3111/05
Source: “Order laboratory analyses of patients' blood or cerebrospinal fluid.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: In a laboratory this follows a written testing algorithm rather than a doctor's judgement, so software can request the right add-on tests reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Supporting external audits by supplying information
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: external audits in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 65 · 3111/01
Source: “Support external audits by supplying information.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Pulling together the records an auditor asks for is document work software handles well, with a person on hand to answer questions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning and running team working schedule to meet operational parameters and stakeholder requirements
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: team working schedule in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 55 · 3111/01
Source: “Plan and run team working schedule to meet operational parameters and stakeholder requirements.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Building a rota around equipment and workload is planning work that scheduling software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Setting goals for continuous improvement in operational efficiency
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: goals in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 55 · 3111/01
Source: “Set goals for continuous improvement in operational efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Setting improvement goals is analysis and writing against records, which tools do well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating laboratory work to ensure efficient use of expensive equipment
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: laboratory work in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 3111/02
Source: “Coordinate laboratory work to ensure efficient use of expensive equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Scheduling shared equipment to avoid clashes is planning work software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing and improving complaint performance through trend analysis and corrective actions
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: complaint performance in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 3111/04
Source: “Manage and improve complaint performance through trend analysis and corrective actions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Complaint trend analysis and corrective action tracking is structured data work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Responding to scientific enquiries from distributors and internal colleagues
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: scientific enquiries in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 50 · 3111/05
Source: “Respond to scientific enquiries from distributors and internal colleagues.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Answering technical questions in writing from documented science is something software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Logging product and processing data on specified forms
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: product in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Log product and processing data on specified forms.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 61 out of 100 (54–68 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Logging readings onto forms is routine data entry that software handles at least as well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Interpreting results as required for senior colleagues
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at results, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/02
Source: “Interpret results as required for senior colleagues.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (52–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Interpreting results for a senior colleague is desk work on documented data, and the senior colleague still makes the final call.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Producing radiation protection documentation to manage radiation safety
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at radiation protection documentation, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 90 · 3111/03
Source: “Produce radiation protection documentation to manage radiation safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Producing the documents is drafting work software does well, though a qualified adviser owns the content.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Using expert knowledge to create reports with instructions
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at expert knowledge, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Use expert knowledge to create reports with instructions, recommendations, and advice on legal and good practice standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Writing up recommendations against legal standards is drafting work software does well, with the adviser accountable.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ensuring compliance with legislation on recording and keeping radiation dose information
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at compliance, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 3111/03
Source: “Ensure compliance with legislation on recording and keeping radiation dose information.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Keeping dose records to the legal standard is structured record-keeping, overseen by a qualified adviser.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing maintenance or testing requirements for radiation protection equipment to ensure compliance with legislative and manufacturer's requirements
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at maintenance, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/03
Source: “Review maintenance or testing requirements for radiation protection equipment to ensure compliance with legislative and manufacturer's requirements.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Comparing equipment schedules against legal and manufacturer requirements is document review software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing product specifications considering key risk factors
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at product specifications considering key risk factors, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Develop product specifications considering key risk factors.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (52–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing a product specification is document work built on documented standards, which software drafts well before a colleague reviews it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Applying theoretical knowledge of science and technology to the required sector and job role
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at theoretical knowledge of science, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3111/05
Source: “Apply theoretical knowledge of science and technology to the required sector and job role.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (44–68 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Applying textbook science to the job is well-documented reasoning software is good at, though the setting is a working lab.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Liaising with academic staff to discuss timetables
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at academic staff, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3111/02
Source: “Liaise with academic staff to discuss timetables, equipment requirements and work plans.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Coordinating timetables and equipment needs is planning work software supports, though colleagues still talk it through.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Presenting statistical data
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at statistical data, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3111/05
Source: “Present statistical data.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Software prepares the charts and summaries very well; the presenting itself is still done by a person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Conducting risk assessments to evaluate potential hazards and ensure safety
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at risk assessments, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/01
Source: “Conduct risk assessments to evaluate potential hazards and ensure safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (45–53 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Risk assessments follow a well documented format software can draft, though someone still has to walk the lab and see the real hazards.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Escalating operating environment issues when parameters are out of specification
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at environment issues, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 3111/01
Source: “Escalate operating environment issues when parameters are out of specification.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Spotting readings outside limits and raising them is largely automatic monitoring, though someone on site judges what matters.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing the stock control of chemicals and equipment
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at the stock control of chemicals, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/02
Source: “Manage the stock control of chemicals and equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Stock systems track chemicals well, though someone still checks shelves and handles hazardous items.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing who may be at risk and estimate the risk magnitude using technical knowledge and data analysis
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at this work, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 3111/03
Source: “Assess who may be at risk and estimate the risk magnitude using technical knowledge and data analysis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Estimating who is at risk and by how much is data analysis software supports strongly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring activities to ensure the accuracy of laboratory results
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at activities, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3111/03
Source: “Monitor activities to ensure the accuracy of laboratory results.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (45–53 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Watching quality control data for drift is exactly the kind of pattern checking software does well, with occasional checks on the bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Establishing and managing cleaning and hygiene programs and monitoring data
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at hygiene programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/04
Source: “Establish and manage cleaning and hygiene programs and monitor data.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Programmes and monitoring dashboards can be drafted, though setting them up involves the cleaning teams.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing and interpreting test data to support clinical diagnostics
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at test data, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 90 · 3111/05
Source: “Analyse and interpret test data to support clinical diagnostics.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 47 out of 100 (43–51 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software reads patterns in test data well, but a registered biomedical scientist must authorise clinical results.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Handovering information to colleagues at the end of a shift
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at information, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/01
Source: “Handover information to colleagues at the end of a shift.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: The handover note can be drafted from records, but shift handovers usually happen in person on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Demonstrating compliance and food safety culture through appropriate tools and methodology
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at compliance, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 3111/04
Source: “Demonstrate compliance and food safety culture through appropriate tools and methodology.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Food safety evidence is largely paperwork and records software drafts well, though showing a real safety culture needs a person in the building.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing and conducting internal audits to ensure compliance with standards
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at internal audits, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 3111/04
Source: “Manage and conduct internal audits to ensure compliance with standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Audit checklists and reports are well documented desk work, though the audit itself means visiting areas and talking to colleagues.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Giving technical advice to staff and students
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles technical advice and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 3111/02
Source: “Give technical advice to staff and students.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Written technical advice is well within software's reach, though staff and students often want to ask a person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining laboratory stocks of equipment and materials to ensure uninterrupted research and testing
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory stocks of equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Maintain laboratory stocks of equipment and materials to ensure uninterrupted research and testing.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 38 out of 100 (31–45 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Stock systems reorder automatically, but keeping the laboratory supplied means handling materials.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting high-level research in a university setting
staying human
The ratings behind this row put high-level research well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 50 · 3111/02
Source: “Conduct high-level research in a university setting.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 37 out of 100 (30–44 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Genuinely new research needs original judgement about what is worth asking and how to test it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring product quality to ensure compliance with standards and specifications
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: product quality, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Monitor product quality to ensure compliance with standards and specifications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 33 out of 100 (26–40 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Quality data is easy for software to track and flag, though checking product on the line still needs someone physically present.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Examining biological specimens under a microscope
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: biological specimens under a microscope, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/04
Source: “Examine biological specimens under a microscope.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 33 out of 100 (26–40 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Image software reads slides well, but someone must still be at the microscope with the specimen in front of them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Examining cell samples to detect abnormalities in the colour
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: cell samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/05
Source: “Examine cell samples to detect abnormalities in the colour, shape, or size of cellular components.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 33 out of 100 (26–40 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Software already reads cell images well, but a technician must be at the microscope with the physical slide, and a senior colleague signs the result.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing radiation exposures using detailed knowledge of equipment and techniques
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for radiation exposures, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 95 · 3111/03
Source: “Assess radiation exposures using detailed knowledge of equipment and techniques.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Dose calculations follow published methods, but a qualified radiation protection adviser is required for this work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing radiation risks in the workplace
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for radiation risks, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 90 · 3111/03
Source: “Assess radiation risks in the workplace.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Risk assessments follow set methods, but they need site knowledge and a legally qualified radiation adviser.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Determining arrangements for using radiation generators and radioactive materials in the workplace
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for arrangements, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 90 · 3111/03
Source: “Determine arrangements for using radiation generators and radioactive materials in the workplace, including storage and movement.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Written arrangements follow regulations software knows, but a qualified adviser must set them for the actual site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Determining the requirements of a workplace-monitoring programme for radiation
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for the requirements of a workplace-monitoring programme, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Determine the requirements of a workplace-monitoring programme for radiation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Programme requirements follow regulations, but a qualified adviser must fit them to the actual workplace.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating control or protection measures to reduce radiation risks using engineering and administrative controls
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for control, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Evaluate control or protection measures to reduce radiation risks using engineering and administrative controls.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Evaluating protection measures uses documented methods, but the judgement is reserved for a qualified adviser.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ensuring compliance with legislative requirements for the accountancy and disposal of radioactive materials
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for compliance, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 75 · 3111/03
Source: “Ensure compliance with legislative requirements for the accountancy and disposal of radioactive materials.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Tracking and disposing of radioactive material follows strict rules, but an accountable person must be present.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Briefing workers on radiation levels in work areas
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for workers, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Brief workers on radiation levels in work areas.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: A briefing can be drafted from dose data, but radiation rules expect a named radiation protection supervisor to give it to workers.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing and delivering scientific training courses to other staff members and international distributors
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles scientific training courses and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 55 · 3111/05
Source: “Develop and deliver scientific training courses to other staff members and international distributors.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Course material can be drafted quickly, but delivering it to staff and distributors is a live human job.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Applying advanced knowledge to address complex radiation protection problems
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for advanced knowledge, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Apply advanced knowledge to address complex radiation protection problems.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Complex radiation problems draw on regulated expertise and site knowledge that goes beyond published guidance.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Designing novel chemical engineering processes for efficient production in the pharmaceutical industry
staying human
The ratings behind this row put novel chemical engineering processes well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 50 · 3111/02
Source: “Design novel chemical engineering processes for efficient production in the pharmaceutical industry.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over.
The rating behind it: Designing genuinely new pharmaceutical processes needs original engineering judgement and regulated expertise.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Resolving and reporting process, quality
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: process, quality, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/01
Source: “Resolve and report process, quality, health and safety, and environmental issues when operating parameters are out of specification.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Fixing an out-of-spec process needs someone at the plant, even though the reporting half is paperwork.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing test results to ensure conformity to specifications using mechanical or electrical devices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: test results, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/03, 3111/05
Source: “Analyse test results to ensure conformity to specifications using mechanical or electrical devices.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Half the work is taking measurements with instruments; the analysis half suits software.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Aiding in quality control processes for food products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: quality control processes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/04
Source: “Aid in quality control processes for food products.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Quality control mixes hands-on sampling with checks against specifications that software can do.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring and controlling temperature of products to ensure food safety
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: temperature of products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/04
Source: “Monitor and control temperature of products to ensure food safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Sensors and software track temperature well, but someone acts on the line when it drifts.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Optimizing and controlling parameters influencing industry processes
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: parameters influencing industry processes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/04
Source: “Optimize and control parameters influencing industry processes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (13–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Controlling process settings is partly analysis and partly hands-on work at the plant.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Analysing samples using scientific instruments to determine chemical composition
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/05
Source: “Analyse samples using scientific instruments to determine chemical composition.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Instruments and software do much of the interpretation, but someone has to prepare and load the physical sample first.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Checking the quality of raw materials to ensure that they conform to specifications and standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the quality of raw materials, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/05
Source: “Check the quality of raw materials to ensure that they conform to specifications and standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Half the check is handling the material; comparing results against specifications suits software.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing experimental apparatus for new product development
staying human
The ratings behind this row put experimental apparatus well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 50 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Design experimental apparatus for new product development.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the five ratings behind the score, with no single dominant reason.
The rating behind it: Designing new apparatus needs original engineering thinking and trial building that software can only sketch.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Designing and implementing new solutions to enhance operational efficiency
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: new solutions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/02
Source: “Design and implement new solutions to enhance operational efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: An improvement can be designed at a desk, but putting it into practice happens in the lab.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Contributing to the development and innovation of new and existing food products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the development, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Contribute to the development and innovation of new and existing food products.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: New product work needs real mixing, tasting and trials, though research and write-up are not physical.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Acting as a subject matter expert in radiation protection to support training development or delivery
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for a subject matter expert, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Act as a subject matter expert in radiation protection to support training development or delivery.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Training material can be drafted, but acting as the recognised expert in the room needs the person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing authoritative advice on the implementation of radiation control measures
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for authoritative advice, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Provide authoritative advice on the implementation of radiation control measures.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (19–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: UK law requires an appointed radiation protection adviser to give this advice, whatever tools help prepare it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collaborating with others to apply technical and practical knowledge for problem-solving in incidents involving multiple factors
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles this work and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 3111/03
Source: “Collaborate with others to apply technical and practical knowledge for problem-solving in incidents involving multiple factors.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Working through a messy incident with colleagues depends on shared site knowledge and live discussion.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting environmental surveys to assess ecological impact and compliance with regulations
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: environmental surveys, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/01
Source: “Conduct environmental surveys to assess ecological impact and compliance with regulations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Environmental surveys need someone on the ground recording what is actually there, though software helps with the report and the regulations.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Implementing quality control programmes to ensure radiation safety
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: quality control programmes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Implement quality control programmes to ensure radiation safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Implementing a programme means changing how work is actually done on site, not just writing it up.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ensuring effective lab practices and adherence to Health & Safety procedures
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: effective lab practices, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/02, 3111/05
Source: “Ensure effective lab practices and adherence to Health & Safety procedures.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: A machine can write and track the safety rules, but keeping lab practice safe day to day still needs someone on the bench floor.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning and carrying out process trials in laboratories
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: process trials, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Plan and carry out process trials in laboratories, pilot plants, or factories.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Planning a trial can be drafted at a desk, but running it in a lab, pilot plant or factory needs people there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Guiding lab staff in synthesising chemical compounds
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: lab staff, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/02
Source: “Guide lab staff in synthesising chemical compounds.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Guiding chemistry work happens at the bench alongside the person doing it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing and carrying out specific scientific experiments to test hypotheses
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: specific scientific experiments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3111/05
Source: “Design and carry out specific scientific experiments to test hypotheses.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Experiments can be designed on paper, but carrying them out involves handling animals and equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Following quality procedures to meet quality standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: quality procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Follow quality procedures to meet quality standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Quality procedures are written down and easy to look up, but actually working to them at the bench is something only the technician does.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting medical research to control and cure diseases
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: medical research, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3111/05
Source: “Conduct medical research to control and cure diseases.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Real research needs experiments run in a lab, though literature work and analysis are more open to software.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recognizing and evaluating the effectiveness of risk and safety leadership behaviours
staying human
The ratings behind this row put the effectiveness of risk well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 70 · 3111/03
Source: “Recognize and evaluate the effectiveness of risk and safety leadership behaviours.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 16 out of 100 (4–28 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the five ratings behind the score, with no single dominant reason.
The rating behind it: Judging how well leaders behave around risk relies on watching people, which is rarely written down.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Serving on safety committees or teams
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles safety committees and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 60 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Serve on safety committees or teams.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Sitting on a safety committee means a person representing colleagues in meetings.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Investigating accidents to identify causes and prevent future occurrences
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: accidents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/03
Source: “Investigate accidents to identify causes and prevent future occurrences.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Accident investigation needs someone to see the scene and win the trust of people involved, though software can structure the report.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Leading and implementing hazard analysis and critical control point system on site
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: hazard analysis, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/04
Source: “Lead and implement hazard analysis and critical control point system on site.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Food safety plans follow a documented method, but leading them on site means walking the process with staff, and practice expects a trained specialist.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Storing chemicals correctly to ensure safety
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: chemicals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/02
Source: “Store chemicals correctly to ensure safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Knowing the storage rules is easy to look up, but putting the chemicals away safely is physical.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Supporting individual students in conducting their research projects
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: individual students, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/02
Source: “Support individual students in conducting their research projects.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supporting a student's project depends on an ongoing personal relationship and hands-on help in the lab.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Carrying out chemical analyses of substances
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: chemical analyses of substances, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Carry out chemical analyses of substances such as acids, alcohols, and enzymes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: The analysis itself happens at the bench with real substances, though software can help plan it and read the numbers.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Inspecting packaging to ensure it meets quality and safety standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: ensure it meets quality, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 55 · 3111/01
Source: “Inspect packaging to ensure it meets quality and safety standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (6–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Checking packaging quality means looking at and handling the actual packs.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Labelling samples accurately for laboratory testing
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Label samples accurately for laboratory testing.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Labelling samples means handling the actual tubes and containers.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Supervising lab assistants in laboratory testing tasks
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: lab assistants, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/03, 3111/05
Source: “Supervise lab assistants in laboratory testing tasks.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervising assistants means being in the lab watching and correcting how work is done.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising food science technicians
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: food science technicians, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/04
Source: “Supervise food science technicians.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervising technicians means being present to watch and correct their work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Adhering to regulations and internal policies relevant to the role
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: regulations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Adhere to regulations and internal policies relevant to the role.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: AI can explain the rules, but following them is something the cleaner does on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Carrying out laboratory tasks following specified methodologies
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory tasks following specified methodologies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/02
Source: “Carry out laboratory tasks following specified methodologies, such as Standard Operating Procedures.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Following a written method at the bench is physical work; software can hold the procedure but cannot carry out the steps.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Performing laboratory tests to produce reliable data for scientific investigations
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/02
Source: “Perform laboratory tests to produce reliable data for scientific investigations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Running laboratory tests is hands-on bench work; software can plan and check the results but cannot pipette or load the instrument.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Adhering to health and safety requirements in the workplace
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: health, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Adhere to health and safety requirements in the workplace.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Safety rules are easy to look up, but following them is about what the technician actually does in the workplace.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Performing safety checks on laboratory equipment and procedures to ensure compliance with safety regulations
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: safety checks, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/02
Source: “Perform safety checks on laboratory equipment and procedures to ensure compliance with safety regulations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Safety checks mean physically inspecting equipment, even though the checklist itself is paperwork.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Calibrating testing instruments
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/03
Source: “Calibrate testing instruments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Calibration means physically adjusting the instrument against a standard; software can only prepare the schedule and hold the certificate.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Processing and analysing biological samples to ensure environmental safety
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: biological samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/03
Source: “Process and analyse biological samples to ensure environmental safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Processing samples is physical bench work, though analysing the resulting data is not.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting standardised biochemical tests to evaluate substances in products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: standardised biochemical tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/04
Source: “Conduct standardised biochemical tests to evaluate substances in products.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Biochemical testing is bench work with real reagents and samples, so software helps mainly with calculating and recording the results.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Testing products to ensure they meet specifications
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Test products to ensure they meet specifications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Testing a product means physically handling it on the bench, so software can only help with the paperwork and the numbers afterwards.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Archiving diagnostic material, such as histological slides and blocks
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: diagnostic material, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/05
Source: “Archive diagnostic material, such as histological slides and blocks.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Archiving slides and blocks means handling and storing real objects, even though the index is a database.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting quality assurance checks to ensure product standards are met
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: quality assurance checks, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/01
Source: “Conduct quality assurance checks to ensure product standards are met.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Checking that products meet standards means handling and examining them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Carrying out fault finding activities on biotechnology equipment to investigate contamination
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fault finding activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/01
Source: “Carry out fault finding activities on biotechnology equipment to investigate contamination.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Tracking down contamination means opening up and testing the actual equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Assisting nanoscientists or engineers in processing or characterising materials according to physical or chemical properties
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: nanoscientists, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Assist nanoscientists or engineers in processing or characterising materials according to physical or chemical properties.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (4–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Processing and characterising materials is hands-on laboratory work with real samples.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Establishing new biotechnology equipment or new operating conditions
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: new biotechnology equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/01
Source: “Establish new biotechnology equipment or new operating conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (4–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Setting up new equipment and operating conditions is hands-on commissioning work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting chemical experiments to develop new compounds or products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: chemical experiments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Conduct chemical experiments to develop new compounds or products.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (4–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Running chemical experiments means handling substances and equipment at the bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Following policies and procedures for radiation workers to ensure personnel safety
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: policies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/03
Source: “Follow policies and procedures for radiation workers to ensure personnel safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Radiation rules are written down, but following them is about how the technician behaves in a controlled area, under a named supervisor.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Operating biotechnology processes in accordance with operational parameters
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: biotechnology processes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/01
Source: “Operate biotechnology processes in accordance with operational parameters.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Running the process means being at the plant controlling real equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Preparing plant for overall shutdown and decommissioning
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: plant, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3111/01
Source: “Prepare plant for overall shutdown and decommissioning.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Preparing a plant for shutdown is mainly physical work on site, with planning documents around it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supporting technologists in food production tasks
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: technologists, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/04
Source: “Support technologists in food production tasks.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Supporting production work means being on the factory floor.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Controlling and monitoring a process or plant and equipment efficiently and securely
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: a process, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/05
Source: “Control and monitor a process or plant and equipment efficiently and securely, resolving problems and abnormal conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Running a plant safely means being there to react to what the equipment is doing, so software can only assist with monitoring.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Participating in toolbox talks to maintain safe and healthy work practices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: toolbox talks, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Participate in toolbox talks to maintain safe and healthy work practices.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Taking part in a site safety talk means being there with the team.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Challenging unsafe behaviours and conditions in the workplace to reinforce health & safety
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: unsafe behaviours, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/03
Source: “Challenge unsafe behaviours and conditions in the workplace to reinforce health & safety.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Challenging someone's unsafe behaviour means being there and saying it to them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Responding appropriately to changes in radiological conditions using the ALARP principles
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: changes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/03
Source: “Respond appropriately to changes in radiological conditions using the ALARP principles.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Reacting to changing radiation conditions requires being present in the area.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Carrying out blood tests for transfusion purposes
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: blood tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/05
Source: “Carry out blood tests for transfusion purposes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Transfusion testing is hands-on laboratory work carried out under strict registered-professional responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Following strict safety procedures to prevent accidents and ensure compliance
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: strict safety procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Follow strict safety procedures to prevent accidents and ensure compliance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (0–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Following safety rules is something a person does while physically working in the lab.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cleaning laboratory instruments or equipment to maintain operational efficiency
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Clean laboratory instruments or equipment to maintain operational efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning instruments means physically handling them at the bench, which software cannot do.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Disinfecting or sterilising laboratory equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Disinfect or sterilise laboratory equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Sterilising equipment is hands-on work in the lab, so software cannot take it over.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Applying specific cleaning and disinfection procedures to maintain hygiene standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: specific cleaning and disinfection procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/01
Source: “Apply specific cleaning and disinfection procedures to maintain hygiene standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Applying cleaning and disinfection procedures means physically treating the surfaces.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing chemical solutions for products or processes following standardised formulas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: chemical solutions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/01, 3111/02
Source: “Prepare chemical solutions for products or processes following standardised formulas.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Making up solutions means measuring and mixing real chemicals by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cleaning failed biotechnology equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: failed biotechnology equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/01
Source: “Clean failed biotechnology equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning failed equipment is physical work at the machine.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Maintaining the work area according to safety and environmental standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the work area, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/01
Source: “Maintain the work area according to safety and environmental standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Keeping the work area clean and safe is physical work in the kitchen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Carrying out first line routine maintenance and testing of process and plant equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: first line routine maintenance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/01
Source: “Carry out first line routine maintenance and testing of process and plant equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Routine maintenance and testing of plant needs hands and tools on the equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting packaging of biotechnology intermediate or final processed product
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: biotechnology intermediate, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 55 · 3111/01
Source: “Conduct packaging of biotechnology intermediate or final processed product.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Packaging product is physical handling on the line.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Cleaning laboratory equipment to ensure accurate experimental results
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/02
Source: “Clean laboratory equipment to ensure accurate experimental results.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning equipment is hands-on bench work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Constructing and maintaining standard laboratory equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: standard laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/02
Source: “Construct and maintain standard laboratory equipment such as centrifuges and titrators.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Building and repairing lab equipment needs hands on the machines.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Operating standard laboratory equipment, pipetting machines and pH meters
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: standard laboratory equipment, pipetting machines and ph meters, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/02
Source: “Operate standard laboratory equipment including pipetting machines and pH meters.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Operating pipettes and meters is hands-on bench work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Disposing of waste in a safe and appropriate manner
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: waste, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Dispose of waste in a safe and appropriate manner.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Waste disposal means physically handling and segregating material, so the work itself cannot be done from a screen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining the equipment in a reliable and safe condition
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Maintain the equipment in a reliable and safe condition.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Keeping equipment safe and working means physically checking and fixing it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Preparing biological and chemical specimens for laboratory analysis
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: biological, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/02
Source: “Prepare biological and chemical specimens for laboratory analysis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Preparing specimens is careful physical work with real samples.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing laboratory equipment and chemicals for educational lessons
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/02
Source: “Prepare laboratory equipment and chemicals for educational lessons.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Setting out apparatus and chemicals is hands-on work at the laboratory bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Demonstrating experimental techniques
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: experimental techniques, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/02
Source: “Demonstrate experimental techniques.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Showing someone how a technique is done requires hands on the equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Using specialist radiological protection instruments to monitor surface and airborne contamination using hand-held contamination rate-meters and installed and portable air samplers
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: specialist radiological protection instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 3111/03
Source: “Use specialist radiological protection instruments to monitor surface and airborne contamination using hand-held contamination rate-meters and installed and portable air samplers.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Contamination monitoring means walking the area with hand-held instruments and samplers.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Carrying out functional tests of radiation protection monitoring instrumentation using calibrated radioactive sealed sources
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: functional tests of radiation protection monitoring instrumentation, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/03
Source: “Carry out functional tests of radiation protection monitoring instrumentation using calibrated radioactive sealed sources.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Testing instruments against real radioactive sources is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Using Forward Control Points, FCP) and Access Control Points
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: forward control points, fcp) and access control points, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/03
Source: “Use Forward Control Points (FCP) and Access Control Points (ACP) to respond to and recover from nuclear incidents.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Responding at control points during an incident requires trained people physically on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Participating in emergency response to provide radiological contingency arrangements to protect personnel
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: emergency response, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/03
Source: “Participate in emergency response to provide radiological contingency arrangements to protect personnel, plant, and the environment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Radiological emergency response requires trained people present at the plant.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Operating, calibrating or maintaining equipment used in quantitative or qualitative analysis
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3111/03
Source: “Operate, calibrate, or maintain equipment used in quantitative or qualitative analysis, such as spectrophotometers, calorimeters, flame photometers, or computer-controlled analysers.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Operating and calibrating analytical instruments needs hands on the equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Setting up, clean and maintaining laboratory equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: up, clean and maintaining laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3111/03, 3111/04, 3111/05
Source: “Set up, clean, and maintain laboratory equipment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Setting up and maintaining equipment is hands-on lab work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Mixing different ingredients and additives to develop food products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: different ingredients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Mix different ingredients and additives to develop food products.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Developing recipes means physically mixing real ingredients.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Overseeing the quality of finished products against recipe specifications
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the quality of finished products against recipe specifications, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Oversee the quality of finished products against recipe specifications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Comparing a finished dish with the recipe means seeing and tasting it yourself.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Testing food samples
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: food samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/04
Source: “Test food samples for moisture, acidity, specific gravity, and butter-fat content until desired levels are achieved.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Testing food samples means handling the samples and the laboratory equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cultivating ingredients to manufacture food or beverage products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: ingredients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/04
Source: “Cultivate ingredients to manufacture food or beverage products.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Growing and culturing ingredients is physical work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Measuring bottles, cans or other containers to ensure dimensions meet specifications
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: bottles, cans or other containers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/04
Source: “Measure bottles, cans, or other containers to ensure dimensions meet specifications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Measuring physical containers requires handling them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Measuring weights of filled containers to check against specifications
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: weights of filled containers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/04
Source: “Measure weights of filled containers to check against specifications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Weighing filled containers is a physical check on the line.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Tasting product samples during production to evaluate flavour and bouquet
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: product samples during production, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 3111/04
Source: “Taste product samples during production to evaluate flavour and bouquet.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Tasting a sample needs a human mouth, which no software has.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Preparing slides with cell cultures for analysis
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: slides, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/04
Source: “Prepare slides with cell cultures for analysis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Preparing slides with cell cultures is delicate hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Preparing laboratory solutions, cultures and specimens for analysis
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory solutions, cultures and specimens, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 3111/05
Source: “Prepare laboratory solutions, cultures, and specimens for analysis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Preparing solutions and cultures is physical bench work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Calibrating laboratory equipment to ensure test accuracy
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Calibrate laboratory equipment to ensure test accuracy.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Calibration means adjusting the actual instrument.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collecting patient samples for laboratory analysis
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: patient samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Collect patient samples for laboratory analysis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Taking samples from patients requires trained hands and a person in the room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Collecting samples, such as blood, urine or sputum from patients
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Collect samples, such as blood, urine, or sputum from patients.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Taking blood or other samples from a patient is entirely hands-on, so there is nothing here software can do in the technician's place.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Preparing cell samples by applying special staining techniques to differentiate cells or cell components
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: cell samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Prepare cell samples by applying special staining techniques to differentiate cells or cell components.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Staining cells is manual bench craft with reagents and slides, so this is hands-on work software cannot take over.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing test solutions, compounds or reagents for laboratory staff to conduct tests
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: test solutions, compounds or reagents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 3111/05
Source: “Prepare test solutions, compounds, or reagents for laboratory staff to conduct tests.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Making up reagents is physical work with real chemicals.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cleaning equipment and following health and safety rules to prevent workplace accidents
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/05
Source: “Clean equipment and follow health and safety rules to prevent workplace accidents.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning equipment and working safely on site are physical actions in the workplace.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing standard volumetric solutions to be combined with samples
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: standard volumetric solutions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3111/05
Source: “Prepare standard volumetric solutions to be combined with samples, following standardised formulas.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Making standard solutions means measuring and mixing by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cutting stain and mounting tissue samples for examination by pathologists
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: stain, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/05
Source: “Cut, stain, and mount tissue samples for examination by pathologists.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cutting, staining and mounting tissue is manual bench craft with a blade and a slide, which software cannot do.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Operating computerised laboratory equipment to dehydrate tissue samples
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: computerised laboratory equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 3111/05
Source: “Operate computerised laboratory equipment to dehydrate tissue samples.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Loading tissue into a processor and handling the reagents is physical work in the lab, whatever the machine's software does afterwards.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cultivating isolate and identifying microorganisms from specimens
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: isolate, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/05
Source: “Cultivate, isolate, and identify microorganisms from specimens.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Culturing and identifying microorganisms is hands-on bench work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Embeding tissue specimens into paraffin wax blocks
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: tissue specimens, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/05
Source: “Embed tissue specimens into paraffin wax blocks.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Embedding tissue in wax blocks is skilled hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Freezing tissue specimens
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: tissue specimens, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3111/05
Source: “Freeze tissue specimens.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Freezing specimens means handling real tissue and equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Inoculating fertilised eggs, broths or other bacteriological media with organisms
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fertilised eggs, broths or other bacteriological media, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3111/05
Source: “Inoculate fertilised eggs, broths, or other bacteriological media with organisms.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Inoculating eggs and media is physical laboratory work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: £28,200a year, before tax, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.ashe-t14, 2025 · ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
How we know this
Source: ashe-t14
Reference period: ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)
Rounding: Shown to the nearest £100. The exact published figure is in the downloadable dataset. We do not render pounds the survey cannot support.
People doing this job: 51,100in the UK, 2026.nomis-aps · Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period)This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: laboratory test results in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: compiling laboratory test results for analysis and developing programmes of sampling and analysis for quality standards. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where laboratory equipment gets done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Start with what does not change: maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 17% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 12% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 71% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 170 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Compiling laboratory test results for analysis is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.

This week: one thing

Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to laboratory test results, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.

What you end up holding: a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
How long it takes: ten minutes

If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether laboratory equipment is in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no licence needed.

Over the next 90 days

Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near creating experimental formulas for chemical solutions. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.

Over the next 12 months

On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, spend an hour with National Careers Service. It is free and government-funded, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest UK occupations to laboratory technicians (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was research and development (r&d) managers: only about 5% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 27/100 here, with only 17% of the task list in the top band, and “clean laboratory instruments or equipment to maintain operational efficiency” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 412 UK occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Research and development (r&d) managers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “perform laboratory tests to produce reliable data for scientific investigations”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 5% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Biochemists and biomedical scientists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already carry out blood tests for transfusion purposes, and their equivalent is to cross-match blood for transfusions. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Chemical scientists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “brief workers on radiation levels in work areas”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 2% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 17% of its task weight, across 170 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United Kingdom figures

The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which Agricultural Technicians is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United States page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

In US official statistics this job is counted as Agricultural Technicians, Food Science Technicians, Biological Technicians, Chemical Technicians, Environmental Science and Protection Technicians, Including Health, Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians, Hydrologic Technicians, Life, Physical, and Social Science Technicians, All Other and Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

In England:
National Careers Service
A free hour with a government-funded careers adviser is worth more than another evening of reading. In England that's the National Careers Service.
Free, government-funded
- Discover your skills and careers (the skills assessment)
In England:
National Careers Service - Find a course
Search what's actually running near you before you spend anything.
Free to search; individual courses vary
In England:
Free courses for jobs (Level 3 qualifications)
A free Level 3 qualification you already qualify for beats a paid course you don't need.
Free for eligible adults
In England:
Skills Bootcamps
Free, up to 16 weeks, and you get a job interview at the end. In England these are Skills Bootcamps - search what's running near you.
Free for eligible adults in England
- Skills Bootcamps - what they are and who can do them (DfE, Skills for Careers)
- Skills Bootcamps - JobHelp (DWP)
In Scotland:
My World of Work (Skills Development Scotland)
In Scotland it's My World of Work, from Skills Development Scotland.
Free, publicly funded
- Skills Development Scotland
In Wales:
Careers Wales
In Wales it's Careers Wales.
Free, Welsh Government-funded
In Northern Ireland:
Careers Service Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland it's the Careers Service on nidirect.
Free, Department for the Economy-funded

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for laboratory technicians, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 17% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for laboratory technicians. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for laboratory technicians launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for laboratory technicians yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for laboratory technicians existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for laboratory technicians launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Laboratory technicians?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 170 official task statements scored for Laboratory technicians (United Kingdom, SOC 3111), 17% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 27 out of 100 (range 22–32, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Laboratory technicians” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare graphs or charts to document experimental results” (93/100, very high); “Enter data into computers for use in analyses or reports” (93/100, very high); “Compile and produce graphs on computers for specialist and general users” (83/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Laboratory technicians” stay human?: About 71% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Inoculate fertilised eggs, broths, or other bacteriological media with organisms” (0/100, minimal); “Freeze tissue specimens” (0/100, minimal); “Embed tissue specimens into paraffin wax blocks” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Laboratory technicians” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 17% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 71% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Laboratory technicians calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 170 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

About the data on this page

Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.
4 rows are marked low confidence, so treat them as a ballpark rather than a fine measurement.
The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
30 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: gaisi-indexProcessing: catalogue-bridge → ssc-relatedness-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: gaisi-index (relatedness)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment: ashe-t14 (ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025))nomis-aps (Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.