MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971360980 · doi:10.4018/jcini.2011100101

Cognitive Informatics and Cognitive Computing in Year 10 and Beyond

2011· article· en· W1971360980 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

VenueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive computingInformaticsComputer scienceCognitionEngineering informaticsData scienceCognitive models of information retrievalInformation scienceLIDABusiness informaticsCognitive scienceField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceHealth informaticsCognitive architecturePsychologyLibrary scienceMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive Informatics (CI) is a transdisciplinary enquiry of computer science, information sciences, cognitive science, and intelligence science that investigates into the internal information processing mechanisms and processes of the brain and natural intelligence, as well as their engineering applications in cognitive computing. The latest advances in CI leads to the establishment of cognitive computing theories and methodologies, as well as the development of Cognitive Computers (CogC) that perceive, infer, and learn. This paper reports a set of nine position statements presented in the plenary panel of IEEE ICCI*CC’11 on Cognitive Informatics in Year 10 and Beyond contributed from invited panelists who are part of the world’s renowned researchers and scholars in the field of cognitive informatics and cognitive computing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.265 · 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