Automation index
How much of a Composer’s job can AI already do?
A mock-up and a part come earlier. Something that sounds and can be played does not.
This percentage does not predict how many people will lose their jobs.
Task comparison
IS WORK OVER?
Composer
21%
AI can already do 21% of this job.
#425 / 653
View rankingComposer
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
Mock-ups, parts and a first arrangement.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 40% | +7.2 |
Write, orchestrate and review with players.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 12% | +2.2 |
Director, producer and opening deadlines.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 22% | +3.5 |
Rights, publishers and versions.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 18% | +2.9 |
Studio, libraries and delivery.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 16% | +2.6 |
Not delivering a score that cannot be played.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 14% | +2.2 |
| Total | 100% | 21% |
Modelled workweek: 100% · Public evidence: 0% · Estimate: 100% · Confidence: Low
Skills and activities
- Mock-ups, parts and a first arrangement
- Write, orchestrate and review with players
- Director, producer and opening deadlines
- Rights, publishers and versions
- Studio, libraries and delivery
- compositor
- composer
Sources for this job· O*NET 27-2041.00· ESCO/ISCO 2652
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