MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123007292 · doi:10.1109/icci.2004.23

On autonomous computing and cognitive processes

2004· article· en· W2123007292 on OpenAlexaff
Yingxu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive computingComputer scienceInformaticsCognitionCognitive architectureHuman–computer interactionAutonomic computingArtificial intelligenceCloud computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the approaches to implement intelligent behaviors by biological organisms, silicon automata, and computing systems. Autonomous computing is introduced as the latest and advanced computing techniques built upon routine, algorithmic, and adaptive systems. The theory and philosophy behind autonomous computing is cognitive informatics. In other words, autonomous computing systems are applications of cognitive informatics. A layered reference model of the brain (LRMB) and its cognitive mechanisms and processes are described in this talk, which form the foundation for designing and implementing autonomous computing systems. Real-time process algebra (RTPA) is introduced to formally and rigorously describe autonomous computing systems and cognitive behaviors. It is believed that applications of cognitive informatics and autonomous computing result in the development of new generation computing architectures and information processing systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE International Conference on Cognitive InformaticsSame topicCognitive Computing and NetworksFrench-language works237,207