MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031861914 · doi:10.1117/12.544176

<title>Defence R&D Canada's autonomous intelligent systems program</title>

2004· article· en· W2031861914 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bruce L. Digney, Paul Hubbard, Éric Gagnon, Marc Lauzon, C.A. Rabbath, Blake Beckman, Jack Collier, Steven G. Penzes, Gregory S. Broten, Simon P. Monckton, Michael Trentini, Bumsoo Kim, Philip Farell, Dave Hopkin

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Defense Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWork (physics)Control (management)Path (computing)Operations researchIndependence (probability theory)Systems engineeringEngineering managementAeronauticsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Defence Research and Development Canada's (DRDC has been given strategic direction to pursue research to increase the independence and effectiveness of military vehicles and systems. This has led to the creation of the Autonomous Intelligent Systems (AIS) prgram and is notionally divide into air, land and marine vehicle systems as well as command, control and decision support systems. This paper presents an overarching description of AIS research issues, challenges and directions as well as a nominal path that vehicle intelligence will take. The AIS program requires a very close coordination between research and implementation on real vehicles. This paper briefly discusses the symbiotic relationship between intelligence algorithms and implementation mechanisms. Also presented are representative work from two vehicle specific research program programs. Work from the Autonomous Air Systems program discusses the development of effective cooperate control for multiple air vehicle. The Autonomous Land Systems program discusses its developments in platform and ground vehicle intelligence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4350.225

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicMilitary Defense Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207