MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2717244153

Proceedings of the 2011 Symposium on Theory of Modeling & Simulation: DEVS Integrative M&S Symposium

2011· article· en· W2717244153 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Wainer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDEVSComputer scienceModeling and simulationBridging (networking)StandardizationSoftware engineeringManagement scienceField (mathematics)Systems engineeringSimulationEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On behalf of the Organizing Committee, we are delighted to welcome you to the 2011 Symposium on Theory of Modeling and Simulation (formerly known as the DEVS Symposium). The purpose of TMS (DEVS)'11 is to provide a forum to discuss most recent advancements in Theory of Modeling and Simulation. The main focus is on theory of modeling, methodology, practice and M&S software, as well as lessons learned and challenges. The Symposium focuses also on bridging different areas in the field of Theory of Modeling and Simulation, including formal modeling, graph transformation, model-checking, modeling methodologies and M&S software. The program includes a wide selection of technical presentations and distinguished speakers, and a collection of state-of-the-art presentations and articles related to research, development, and applications of Theory of Modeling and Simulation. This year two workshops are hosted by the conference: Mod4Sim focuses on model-driven approaches for simulation engineering, and the DEVS Standardization workshop focuses on standards for DEVS.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.015

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207