The use of simulation in determining operational needs (WIP)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past five years, the Canadian Forces Warfare Center (CFWC), a unit within the Canadian Joint Operations Center (CJOC), has conducted a series of experiments referred to as the Coalition Attack Guidance Experiment (CAGE). These are structured as human-in-the-loop experiments, conducted at an operational headquarters level by in situ military personnel assuming operational roles. Although each CAGE has had its own emphasis and purpose, the focus of the most recent CAGE was battlespace deconfliction. This included the physical and electronic requirements of each operational position in a Headquarters, such as the command and control systems for joint fires support co-ordination. The interaction between participants and their computers was recorded, providing the data for analysis. These results showed the applications that were most required and those that were not, as well as the applications that could be expected to use the most bandwidth. This information may be used in planning for the construction of a Theater Operations Center and in equipping the essential personnel.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it