MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards autonomic marketing

2012· article· en· W26293774 on OpenAlexaff
Carl Adams, Richard Anthony, Wendy Powley, David Bell, Chris White, Chun You Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketing managementComputer scienceMarketing researchDigital marketingBusiness marketingMarketing strategyMarketingReturn on marketing investmentMerge (version control)Knowledge managementBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores one of the current innovation waves within computing technology, that of the application of Autonomic Computing (AC) to the marketing domain – termed ―Autonomic Marketing‖, the result being an adaptive, highly effective marketing strategy set to significantly change target marketing and a company’s relationship with customers. Marketing has often been at the forefront of business adoption and utilization of the latest computing technologies and functionality. Indeed, the marketing function is interlinked with technology and has been proactively using the capabilities of new technologies from the earliest databases and mail merge functionality to sophisticated Customer Relationship Management systems and intelligent behavioural marketing systems. The Autonomic Computing paradigm provides a framework in which marketing systems could become self-configuring and context-aware, using a variety of learning and decision-making techniques, providing the potential of even more refined targeting of marketing information to customers. In this paper, we introduce the concept of Autonomic Marketing and outline some of the research issues involved in the implementation of such a system that will, indeed revolutionize the marketing world.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous SystemsSame topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207