MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1564313940 · doi:10.1609/aimag.v31i4.2318

Reports of the AAAI 2010 Conference Workshops

2010· article· en· W1564313940 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAI Magazine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAbstractionPlan (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The AAAI‐10 workshop program was held Sunday and Monday, July 11–12, 2010, at the Westin Peachtree Plaza in Atlanta, Georgia. The AAAI‐10 workshop program included 13 workshops covering a wide range of topics in artificial intelligence. The titles of the workshops were AI and Fun; Bridging the Gap Between Task and Motion Planning; Collaboratively Built Knowledge Sources and Artificial Intelligence; Goal‐Directed Autonomy; Intelligent Security; Interactive Decision Theory and Game Theory; Metacognition for Robust Social Systems; Model Checking and Artificial Intelligence; Neural‐Symbolic Learning and Reasoning; Plan, Activity, and Intent Recognition; Statistical Relational AI; Visual Representations and Reasoning; and Abstraction, Reformulation, and Approximation. This article presents short summaries of those events.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.277 · 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