INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Pilotage and tug service records for AI event matching
A port-call record can contain separate events for the pilot and the tug.
NAICS 488330 · Navigational Services to Shipping
A port-call record can contain separate events for the pilot and the tug. One confirmation does not establish that the other service was ready. IMO’s pilotage and port-call resources describe the operational context. A service provider can use invented events to test whether a model builds an accurate retrospective summary. IMO pilotage context · IMO port-call event guide
Make up two calls with identical planned times. Record an authorized pilot boarding in one and a separate tug acknowledgment. Put an actual movement record on only one call. Ask the model to match role, service, and time to the correct call, then identify which events remain unverified. Include a late message correcting one service time.
Keep communications, exact access points, routes, vessel and personnel information, and harbor procedures private. Use offline records and an exercise-specific review rubric. Do not use the output to direct navigation.
Describe a marine service timing sample
Original Fiund exercise
Pilot boarding, tug acknowledgment and vessel movement are distinct call events
An original two-call simulation uses fictional service roles and abstract time references. It includes no vessel, personnel, harbor procedure, route or navigation instruction.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| MPT1 | Call A records | Pilot boarding confirmed 08:00; later authorized correction changes that service time to 08:05. Tug request acknowledged 08:00, no tug-arrival event. |
| MPT2 | Call A movement | Separate original movement event confirmed 08:20 for A. It does not state tug arrival or readiness. |
| MPT3 | Call B | Same planned service time 08:00. Pilot request accepted, no boarding or movement. No A-to-B identity relationship. |
Question for the model
Which A milestones and corrected time are supported, and can its movement or B's matching plan establish the other service events?
Show the reference answer and checks
MPT1 supports A's pilot boarding at corrected 08:05 and a separate tug-request acknowledgment. MPT2 documents A's 08:20 movement without confirming tug arrival. MPT3 supplies only accepted pilot request for B; its matching planned time cannot inherit A's boarding or movement. Keep call identity, role, event type and correction scope together rather than use one milestone as proof of another service's readiness.
- Treating tug acknowledgment as arrival or movement as proof of every support service.
- Propagating one call's corrected pilot time to another call sharing its plan.
Fields to preserve
- Call and service role
- Defines the event.
- Planned/acknowledged/boarded/movement type
- Separates milestones.
- Correction parent and effective time
- Preserves the current source.
Test another case
Add B's boarding confirmation in an unknown time zone. Require occurrence to resolve while precise cross-call timing remains unverified.
Use original offline records and a limited rubric. Exclude harbor communications and access points; no output directs navigation.
Discuss a contribution
Describe the sources you control, the task they could support and what has already been checked. Use the existing-data assessment for an archive or the collection brief for a new recording project. The contributor agreement defines Fiund’s licensing authority and compensation. A guide or fictional exercise does not establish an accepted collection or a sale.