MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550267165

Intelligent Decision Support for Emergency Responses

2012· article· en· W2550267165 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Khalili-Araghi, Brian Fisher, Uwe Glässer, Piper Jackson, Hamed Yaghoubi Shahir

Bibliographic record

VenueISCRAM · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatrollingOrchestrationSituation awarenessTask (project management)Command and controlComputer scienceDecision support systemVariety (cybernetics)Resource (disambiguation)Process managementComputer securityRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringEngineeringBusinessArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a coastline touching upon the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, the Great Lakes and the Arctic Sea, the Canadian MSOCs are faced with a daunting task. They are responsible for both routine duties, including patrolling coastal areas and collecting satellite data, as well as critical missions, such as emergency response and crime intervention. Both kinds of mission require the fusion of data from a variety of sources and the orchestration of myriad heterogeneous resources over great physical distances. They must deal with uncertainty, both in terms of what can be known and also in the outcomes of actions, and must interact with an environment prone to dynamic change. We present the architecture and core mechanisms of a decision support system for marine safety and security operations (Glasser, Jackson, Araghi, When and Shahir, 2010). The goal of this system is to enhance complex command and control tasks by improving situational awareness and automating task assignments. This system concept includes adaptive information fusion techniques integrated with decentralized control mechanisms for dynamic resource configuration management and task execution management under uncertainty. Autonomously operating agents employ collaboration and coordination to collectively form an intelligent decision support system.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.372 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISCRAMSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207