MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153048671 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2004.1265291

Context, ontology and portfolio: key concepts for a situational awareness knowledge portal

2004· article· en· W2153048671 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Gauvin, Anne-Claire Boury-Brisset, Alain Auger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersDivision of Materials Research
KeywordsComputer scienceSituation awarenessKnowledge managementOntologyContext (archaeology)Domain knowledgeKey (lock)Knowledge sharingDomain (mathematical analysis)BattlespaceWork (physics)PortfolioComputer securityEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vision leading the development of a situational awareness knowledge portal to support the Canadian National Defence Command Center in monitoring and directing strategic-level operations is to provide each individual with a customized, mission-oriented knowledge desktop that gives access to the right information from multiple sources in the context of the work and contributes to the building and sharing of the "collective battlespace knowledge". The approach lays on three intertwined fundamental concepts, namely context, ontology and portfolio. The delimitation of the work into well-scoped portfolios allows, to a certain extent, to confine the knowledge handled. The exploitation of this knowledge using appropriate domain ontologies make it feasible to provide contextual assistance in various ways to the work performed within portfolios, and accordingly to user/group preferences. This paper formalizes these concepts and their interrelationships.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207