MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166631165 · doi:10.1109/wimob.2007.4390863

Reasoning with Contextual Data in Telehealth Applications

2007· article· en· W2166631165 on OpenAlexaff
Nadjia Kara, O. Andrei Dragoi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)OntologyContext awarenessInference engineUbiquitous computingContext managementInferenceContext modelProcess (computing)Data scienceAdaptation (eye)Human–computer interactionArchitectureContextual designWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of context-awareness is making its way in the area of mobile-health application designed to assist patients outside a hospital and medical professionals within a hospital. Such ubiquitous computing applications go beyond simple biomedical data-collection so the management of the context becomes more challenging, and the complexity of the context-based decision-algorithms warrants the use of full-blown inference engines. The context is a very volatile notion, so building a context-aware system means more than just creating a context ontology and defining inference rules for that model. This paper proposes mechanisms to dynamically manage the contextual decisions and actions. It devises a model and its properties for the process of taking each individual context-based decision. An architecture centered around this model is defined, integrating an off-the-shelf inference engine that reasons on context-data expressed in the OWL language. The architecture was refined and validated through the implementation of a prototype remote biomonitoring system. The prototype combines context-adaptation and awareness with the ubiquity of 3G network-coverage to allow for more personalized monitoring and better streamlining of information between the various health care players. It can be easily adapted and extended with extra inference-rules, additional actions, and more context items.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207