MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Multi Agent/HLA Platform for Enterprises Interoperability

2011· book-chapter· en· W2484358950 on OpenAlexaff
Grégory Zacharewicz, Olivier Labarthe, David Chen, Bruno Vallespir

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in business information systems and analytics book series · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityOntologyComputer scienceSemantic interoperabilityKnowledge managementCross-domain interoperabilityEnterprise modellingReuseEnterprise integrationInformation exchangeSoftware engineeringWorld Wide WebEnterprise softwareEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter aims at proposing an implementation of the federation interoperability concept for information exchange between networked enterprises. This implementation makes use of Multi Agent / HLA paradigm and the emerging concept of Short-Lived Ontology. The authors give first, a review of ongoing researches on Enterprise Interoperability. Then, they recall on Artificial Agent Concept and HLA Standard that appear to be adequate to support simulation and execution of the studied concept. Indeed, on the one hand Agent dialogue fits the concept of information exchange in a federated enterprise interoperability approach, on the other hand the HLA standard, initially designed for military M&S purpose, can be transposed for enterprise interoperability at the implementation level, reusing the years of experiences in distributed systems. From these postulates, we propose the first Agent/HLA Short-Lived Ontology based framework to implement distributed enterprise models from the conceptual level of federated enterprise interoperability approach.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.011
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in business information systems and analytics book seriesSame topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207