Automation index
How much of a Art conservator’s job can AI already do?
A photo and an analysis come earlier. The scalpel, and not loading the work, do not.
This percentage does not predict how many people will lose their jobs.
Task comparison
IS WORK OVER?
Art conservator
21%
AI can already do 21% of this job.
#450 / 653
View rankingArt conservator
Where the time goes
Task weights are our estimates based on O*NET frequency data, not time shares published by O*NET.
The time saving for each task is estimated separately.
| Task | Share | AI | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
Survey, photos, analysis and the treatment proposal.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 40% | +6.4 |
Cleaning, fill, inpainting and protection.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 22% | 8% | +1.8 |
Reversibility, and not overworking the piece.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 22% | +3.5 |
Report, dossier and the owner’s or museum’s yes.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 28% | +4.5 |
Transport, climate and the piece’s setting.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 18% | +2.9 |
Ethics and liability for what is touched.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 14% | 12% | +1.7 |
| Total | 100% | 21% |
Modelled workweek: 100% · Public evidence: 0% · Estimate: 100% · Confidence: Low
Skills and activities
- conserve art
- clean paint
- inpainting
- fills
- treatment report
- reversibility
- analyse the work
- not overworking the piece
Sources for this job· O*NET 25-4013.00· ESCO/ISCO 2621
IS WORK OVER?
Clinical research associate
27%
#172 / 653
View rankingClinical research associate
Where the time goes
Task weights are our estimates based on O*NET frequency data, not time shares published by O*NET.
The time saving for each task is estimated separately.
| Task | Share | AI | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
Protocol, CRF and the monitoring visit.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 48% | +8.6 |
Source, the gap and the one that does not fit.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 40% | +6.4 |
Adverse event, the deadline and not delaying.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 22% | +3.5 |
Consent, the signature and the one who did not understand.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 28% | +4.5 |
The sponsor, the audit and not dressing the figure.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 14% | +2.5 |
Audit, and not leaving a made-up figure.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 12% | +1.9 |
| Total | 100% | 27% |
Modelled workweek: 100% · Public evidence: 0% · Estimate: 100% · Confidence: Low
Skills and activities
- CRF
- monitoring
- adverse events
- informed consent
- source data
- trial audits
- clinical protocols
- site visits
Sources for this job· O*NET 11-9121.00· ESCO/ISCO 2131