MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124190566 · doi:10.1109/itng.2006.116

RL-Agent That Learns in Collaborative Virtual Environment

2006· article· en· W2124190566 on OpenAlexafffund
Elhadi Shakshuki, A.W. Matin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAcadia University
KeywordsWorkspaceComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionReinforcement learningVirtual machineCollaborative virtual environmentIntelligent agentVirtual learning environmentSoftware agentCollaborative softwareCollaborative learningSoftwareVirtual realityWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligenceKnowledge managementRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, collaborative virtual environments consider intelligent software agents as essential part of the environment. In these environments, there is a need of agents that have the ability to learn user actions, which are gained from the experience of interactions with the users. This learning capability will predict the future actions of the user and provide better solutions to them. Collaborative virtual workspace (CVW) is a collaborative virtual environment where agents can be created and perform important tasks for the user. This paper presents an agent with the ability to monitor the user's actions and has the learning capability using reinforcement learning algorithm. To demonstrate the feasibility of this agent, it is implemented and demonstrated in FCVW an extension of CVW, an environment for collaboration and knowledge management

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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