MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104968912 · doi:10.1109/itng.2007.132

Negotiation Strategies for Agent-based Meeting Scheduling System

2007· article· en· W2104968912 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Agent-Based Network Management
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)ScheduleTask (project management)Multi-agent systemOperations researchHuman–computer interactionEngineeringArtificial intelligenceOperations managementSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing personal meetings and events is a complicated task. It becomes more problematic when a person has numerous meetings or events in their schedule. One of the challenges of managing meetings is to find a proper meeting time when a conflict occurs. This paper presents negotiation strategies for an agent-based meeting scheduling system to automatically solve meeting conflicts. These relieve the user from having to find free meeting times manually. The agent will utilize these negotiation strategies to find an acceptable time slot that best fits the constraints and preferences for its user. A prototype is implemented and demonstrated

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Agent-Based Network ManagementFrench-language works237,207