MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097549652 · doi:10.1109/cisda.2009.5356527

Dynamical networks as a tool for system analysis and exploration

2009· article· en· W2097549652 on OpenAlexaff
Irène Pestov, Simona Verga

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInterdependenceComplex systemData scienceDynamical systems theoryComputational intelligenceArtificial intelligenceInterdependent networksComplex networkMachine learningTheoretical computer scienceDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper attempts to bring together methods and tools across three selected areas of computational intelligence pertaining to complex systems: dynamical networks, statistical machine learning, and multi-agent technologies. The paper begins with a discussion of computational challenges arising from growing complexity in modern operating environments. Then the discussion proceeds to an overview of intelligent tools that can be used to address these challenges. The emphasis is given to dynamical networks as the means for consolidating ideas and approaches. An illustrative example shows how the network-based tools can be used to model complex socio-technical systems, to identify hidden interdependencies among their components, and to explore their vulnerabilities in simulations.

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)0.009
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207