MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135919290 · doi:10.1109/aina.2005.79

Agent Frameworks in FCVW

2005· article· en· W2135919290 on OpenAlexafffund
Elhadi Shakshuki, Ivan Tomek, O. Prabhu

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 scienceMiddleware (distributed applications)Software engineeringField (mathematics)Collaborative softwareSoftware frameworkSoftwareSoftware developmentWorld Wide WebComponent-based software engineeringDistributed computingProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for frameworks in the software engineering field is being realized as the complexities and cost of software is increasing. Frameworks will provide an edge for any software industry in the 21st century. Frameworks of various kinds have been developed for many object oriented applications in the past but there have been very few attempts to develop agent frameworks in collaborative virtual environments. This paper presents the ongoing research to build agent frameworks for the federated collaborative virtual workspace (FCVW), our extension of MITRE's CVW (collaborative virtual workspace). We propose two types of agent frameworks namely the middleware and client framework. This paper focuses on client framework development and shows several types of agents that are in preparation for the development of a more general framework.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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