MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115767190 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1999.808171

Modeling intelligent information resource agents for dynamic heterogeneous sources

2003· article· en· W2115767190 on OpenAlexaff
W. Moussawi, Samuel Pierre, H.H. Hoang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIntelligent agentResource (disambiguation)ArchitectureInformation modelInformation systemObject (grammar)Multi-agent systemAgent architectureDistributed computingSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To discover and retrieve information in an open and dynamically changing environment, a multiagent system, called ISAME, has been proposed. The information gathering and analysis, in this system, are performed over networks of autonomous heterogeneous information sources. ISAME serves as a facilitating environment for four categories of agents, each one being specialized in a series of activities needed to complete a main goal which is performing the role of a digital version of user assistant dedicated for intelligent information retrieval. Among those agent categories, Information Agents (IA) present some important conceptual challenges. This paper presents a generic object-oriented model for IA that respects the dynamical and heterogeneous nature of data sources, and fits the ISAME architecture specifications.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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