MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599226259 · doi:10.1002/cav.1749

CODE: Crowd‐optimized design of environments

2017· article· en· W2599226259 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Animation and Virtual Worlds · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of British ColumbiaYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceModular designCode (set theory)Crowd simulationAggregate (composite)Design flowHuman–computer interactionEmbedded systemProgramming languageCrowds

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present crowd‐optimized design of environments ( CODE ): a “crowd‐aware” computational tool for designing environments (e.g., building floor plans). Our system analyses the impact of newly added environment elements (e.g., pillars or doorways) on the resulting crowd flow, using current‐generation crowd simulators. The results of the simulation are used to provide feedback to the designer in terms of aggregate statistics and heat maps. Additionally, our system is able to “automatically” optimize the placement of environment elements to maximize crowd flow in egress scenarios, while satisfying constraints that are imposed by the designer. Using CODE , architects and environment designers can iteratively refine upon their original design to quickly accommodate the dynamic properties of crowd simulations in an interactive fashion. CODE is modular and flexible so that designers may build environments, select from different crowd simulators, and specify varying crowd configurations.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.223 · 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