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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.
VenueCalhoun: The Naval Postgraduate School Institutional Archive (Naval Postgraduate School) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Automated Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNaval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft DivisionAir Force Institute of TechnologyLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryOffice of Naval ResearchJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyNaval Air Warfare Center, Weapons DivisionU.S. Naval Research LaboratoryUnited States Marine CorpsDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidNaval Air Systems CommandJet Propulsion LaboratoryDefense Threat Reduction AgencyMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryTransport CanadaLangley Research CenterNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyUniversity of MemphisUniversity at BuffaloCalifornia State University, Monterey BayFederal Emergency Management AgencyH. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research InstituteUniversity of DaytonUniversity of Notre DameUniversity of South CarolinaNational Science FoundationOklahoma State UniversityUniversity of MinnesotaWichita State UniversityWake Forest UniversityUniversity of Nevada, Las VegasU.S. Department of StateUtah State UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationUniversity of South FloridaNaval Sea Systems CommandU.S. Department of EnergyUniversities Space Research AssociationU.S. Department of DefenseLeidosUniversity of PittsburghU.S. Department of Homeland SecuritySandia National LaboratoriesUnited States Special Operations CommandU.S. Department of JusticeUniversity of Oklahoma
KeywordsRoboticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceAeronauticsEngineeringRobot
DOInot available
Abstract
fetched live from OpenAlexPrepared for: Raymond R. Buettner Jr., CRUSER Director and Dr. Brian Bingham, CRUSER Deputy Director
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.
metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score1.000
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
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.
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
