MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084479812 · doi:10.1177/0037549703039949

A Framework for Remote Execution and Visualization of Cell-DEVS Models

2003· article· en· W2084479812 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Wainer, Wenhong Chena

Bibliographic record

VenueSIMULATION · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVRMLVisualizationMarkup languageDEVSInterface (matter)Event (particle physics)WorkstationDiscrete event simulationVariety (cybernetics)User interfaceVirtual realityHuman–computer interactionDistributed computingModeling and simulationXMLOperating systemSimulationData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulation is becoming increasingly important in the analysis and design of complex systems with natural and artificial components. CD++ is a modeling and simulation tool that was created to study these kinds of systems by using a discrete event cell-based approach. It was successfully employed to define a variety of models for complex applications. Here, the authors present different extensions done to the tool using a client-server architecture. Users can create models in local workstations, execute them in a remote high-performance simulation engine, and then receive, visualize, and analyze the results locally with easy-to-use 2D and 3D interfaces. The 3D interface was built using the virtual reality markup language (VRML) to facilitate Web-based visualization. The tool now enables running several models simultaneously and supports multiview outputs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIMULATIONSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207