MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158174897

Coordinating Plans for Agents Performing AAW Hardkill and Softkill for Frigates

2001· article· en· W2158174897 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dale E. Blodgett, S. Paquet, Pierrick Plamondon, Brahim Chaib-draa, Peter Kropf

Bibliographic record

VenuereroDoc Digital Library · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus (optics)SurvivabilityClass (philosophy)Process managementComputer scienceCommand and controlAeronauticsSystems engineeringControl (management)Operations researchEngineeringTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceComputer network
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coordination of anti-air warfare (AAW) hardkill (HK) and softkill (SK) weapon systems is an important aspect of command and control for the HALIFAX Class Frigate. This led to the development of a rapid prototyping environment, described here, which supports the investigation of methods to coordinate the plans produced by AAW HK and SK agents. The HK and SK planning agents are described. An overview of agent coordination methods is provided, with a focus on our initial approach to HK and SK coordination via a Central Coordinator. This approach was successfully implemented, and proved effective in mitigating interference between HK and SK actions, and improved the overall survivability of the Frigate. Finally, future directions of this research are presented.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuereroDoc Digital LibrarySame topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207