MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172091626 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.1997.635442

Graph theory-the key to AI applications in dynamics

2002· article· en· W2172091626 on OpenAlexafffund
Gordon C. Andrews, Ling Lo, Carissa Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKinematicsComputer scienceBlackboard systemArtificial intelligenceGraphSolverSystem dynamicsTheoretical computer scienceBlackboard (design pattern)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this research was to develop an expert system for dynamic and kinematic mechanical systems. This goal was achieved through a creative combination of a previously-developed graph-theory technique, the vector-network method, plus the blackboard technique from artificial intelligence, implemented in the MAPLE algebraic manipulation language. The resulting program, KINDY (kinematic/dynamic problem solver) was successfully tested on a variety of two-dimensional kinematic and dynamic problems involving particles. It has since been superseded by DBS (for dynamic blackboard system) which has the capability of solving systems with rigid bodies and closed kinematic chains. This combination of methods holds great promise for artificial intelligence applications in dynamics.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScience Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207