MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243346683 · doi:10.1177/0037549715590594

Grand challenges for modeling and simulation: simulation everywhere—from cyberinfrastructure to clouds to citizens

2015· article· en· W2243346683 on OpenAlexaff
Simon J. E. Taylor, Azam Khan, Katherine L. Morse, Andreas Tolk, Levent Yılmaz, Justyna Zander, Pieter J. Mosterman

Bibliographic record

VenueSIMULATION · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsAutodesk (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyberinfrastructureComposabilityCloud computingKey (lock)Grand ChallengesDemocratizationField (mathematics)Scale (ratio)Computer scienceBig dataModeling and simulationData sciencePolitical scienceSimulationComputer securityPoliticsDemocracyDistributed computingPhysicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling & Simulation (M&S) is making successful contributions to different areas in industry and academia. However, there are certain key issues that are preventing the field from addressing larger domains and from achieving wide-scale impact. Formulating these as grand challenges arguably focuses attention on these key issues and may bring a critical mass of effort to bear that could result in a major leap forward. This article is one of several concurrent activities aimed at reinvigorating the debate on grand challenges in M&S. These grand challenges include Big Simulation, human behavior, composability, cloud-based M&S, reproducibility in M&S research and the democratization of M&S. Two themes emerge: the need for large-scale cloud-based cyberinfrastructures for M&S and the democratized access to M&S and its outputs.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0140.021
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.279
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations68
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIMULATIONSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207