MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977146076

Proceedings of the Ninth ACM International Workshop on Data Engineering for Wireless and Mobile Access

2010· article· en· W1977146076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Phillip B. Gibbons, Demetrios Zeinalipour-Yazti, Hui Lei, Suman Nath

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNinthLibrary scienceComputer scienceBeijingMobile computingChinaTelecommunicationsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you all to the Ninth ACM International Workshop on Data Engineering for Wireless and Mobile Access (MobiDE'10), held in conjunction with SIGMOD 2010. MobiDE continues its tradition of bringing together researchers and practitioners in databases, mobile computing, and networking, and providing a full day of exciting presentations and discussions. As in previous years, the workshop serves as a forum to present latest research and engineering results and contributions, and set future directions in wireless and mobile data management. MobiDE'10 is the ninth of a successful series of workshops that aims to act as a bridge between the data management, wireless networking, and mobile computing communities. The 1st MobiDE workshop took place in Seattle, USA (August 1999), in conjunction with MobiCom 1999. The 2nd MobiDE workshop was held in Santa Barbara, USA (May 2001), together with SIGMOD 2001. The 3rd MobiDE workshop was organized in San Diego, USA (September 2003), co-located with MobiCom 2003. The 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th MobiDE workshops took place in Baltimore, USA (June 2005), Chicago, USA (June 2006), Beijing, China (June 2007), Vancouver, Canada (June 2008), and Providence, USA (June 2009), respectively, co-located with SIGMOD.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.026

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207