MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013640034 · doi:10.3166/ria.19.519-535

Context-based Retrieval for Explainable Reasoning

2005· article· fr· W2013640034 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stefan Schulz, Thomas Roth–Berghofer

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Information retrievalArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the background of mobile, ubiquitous, and pervasive applications, context determination and assignment is a necessary factor to provide IT solutions suited to a user and the user's current situation. In this paper, context is seen as n-ary relationship. Context gets embedded into ontologies, which are used to structure application specific knowledge. We present an integrative, case-based modelling approach for context and context management. We discuss the incorporation of context-based reasoning and explanation. And finally, we show how to apply our approach for trust management.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.266 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207