MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083028796 · doi:10.1109/ctit.2011.6107933

Issues in multi-agent systems for e-government applications

2011· article· en· W2083028796 on OpenAlexaff
Sehl Mellouli, Faouzi Bouslama

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGovernment (linguistics)Software agentCloud computingSoftwareMulti-agent systemIntelligent agentE-GovernmentComputer securityKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebSoftware engineeringInformation and Communications TechnologyArtificial intelligenceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an earlier paper, we introduced an e-government framework based on multi-agent software components as a solution to achieve better access to online services to citizens. In this paper, we define what the “Citizen Agent” in a multi-agent based framework is and how this software entity can be distributed in a government computing cloud. We look at the many challenges of adopting this concept of citizen agent in e-government organizations. We also provide details on how this software entity adapt online and in real-time to environment changes, how it learns from and improve through interaction with other intelligent agents in the information and communication technology infrastructure, and how it can respond in a secured way to requests from government agencies and units.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0130.021
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0120.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207