MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling Context-Aware Distributed Event-Based Systems

2012· book-chapter· en· W2489483268 on OpenAlexaff
Eduardo S. Barrenechea, Rolando Blanco, Paulo Alencar

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEvent (particle physics)Context (archaeology)Component (thermodynamics)MetamodelingAdaptation (eye)Context modelContext awarenessSituation awarenessContext managementData scienceDistributed computingHuman–computer interactionUbiquitous computingSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging applications are becoming increasingly dynamic, adaptive, and context-aware in areas such as just-in-time, location-based m-commerce; situational health monitoring; and dynamic social networking collaboration. Although numerous systems and implementation infrastructures have been proposed to deal with some features of such systems, there is a lack of higher-level modeling abstractions and associated component metamodels that combine dynamic features, adaptation mechanisms, and context-awareness. In this chapter the authors propose a metamodel for context-aware distributed event-based systems that supports novel forms of event-based context-aware interactions such as context event schemas; component interfaces that react to context, event, and context interactions at the interface level; and subscriptions based on both events and context. The approach also supports requirements for context-aware systems proposed in the literature. The applicability of the approach is illustrated by showing how existing context-aware systems can be modeled using the proposed metamodel.Request access from your librarian to read this chapter's full text.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207