MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1415022288

Training on multi-agent systems, social sciences, and integrated natural resource management : lessons from an Inter-University Project in Thailand

2005· book-chapter· en· W1415022288 on OpenAlexfundno aff
François Bousquet, Guy Trébuil

Bibliographic record

VenueAgritrop (Cirad) · 2005
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersInternational Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentEuropean CommissionInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsKnowledge managementResource (disambiguation)Field (mathematics)TransdisciplinarityStrengths and weaknessesNatural resource managementManagement scienceEngineering ethicsComputer scienceNatural resourceEngineeringPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologySocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this new century, there is an urgent need to integrate and organize knowledge into suitable frameworks to examine essential problems with the people involved in solving them. Recent advances in computer science, particularly distributed artificial intelligence and multi-agent systems (MAS), are creating a strong interest in using this new knowledge and technologies for various applications to better deal with the increasing complexity of our fast-changing world, particularly for studying interactions between societies and their environment. By emphasizing the importance of interactions and points of view, the MAS way of thinking can facilitate high-level interdisciplinary training and collaborative research among scientists working in ecology and social sciences to examine complex problems in the field of integrated natural resource management (INRM). This paper describes how a recent project based on a series of short courses in the field of MAS, social sciences, and INRM at three different universities in Thailand tried to transfer European expertise and research results to an Asian audience of graduate and postgraduate students and young researchers interested in innovative and action-research-oriented interdisciplinary approaches. The course structure, organization, and contents are described and assessed. The course participants are characterized and their opinions are used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of this very interdisciplinary training program. The first sustainable outputs and key preliminary lessons learned from this innovative collective learning experience are presented. In conclusion, the authors suggest ways to support the emergence of a regional network of "MAS for INRM" practitioners in Southeast Asia to build on the dynamics begun by this project and serve the need for such interdisciplinary training across Southeast Asia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgritrop (Cirad)Same topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207