MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915038730

Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual symposium on Computational geometry

2010· article· en· W2915038730 on OpenAlexaff
David Kirkpatrick, Joseph S. B. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)Computer scienceLibrary scienceProcess (computing)Operations researchEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This volume collects the research papers, short descriptions of the video presentations, and summaries of the two invited talks, that together constitute the technical proceedings of the 26th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG 2010), held June 13-16, at Snowbird, Utah, USA. A total of 145 papers were received in response to the call for papers. The program committee reviewed the submissions carefully, with a distributed effort that included expert input from both members of the program committee and a host of external reviewers (acknowledged herein); the substantial help provided by the external reviewers, under serious time constraints, is very gratefully acknowledged. The program committee deliberated electronically from January 25 to February 13; based on reviews and discussions, a total of 47 papers were selected for presentation at the symposium. The on-line review process, and the electronic discussion and decision process were all conducted with the aid of the free conference management system EasyChair. The papers presented in these proceedings generally represent preliminary, often abstracted, results of ongoing research. We anticipate that most of these papers will eventually appear in a more fully developed form in refereed journals. In addition to the technical papers, seven videos were received in response to the call for videos and multimedia submissions. Five videos were accepted by the video and multimedia committee for presentation at the symposium. The web proceedings showcase the revised videos at http://www.computational-geometry.org/SoCG-videos/socg10video/.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0920.036

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207