MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022560185

Representation, reasoning, and learning for a relational influence diagram applied to a real-time geological domain

2014· article· en· W3022560185 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Dirks, Andrew Csinger, Andrew Bamber, David Poole

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMineSense Technologies (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSortingInferenceBinComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)Process (computing)Influence diagramDiagramDomain (mathematical analysis)ThroughputData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmDecision treeDatabase
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mining companies typically process all the material ex-tracted from a mine site using processes which are ex-tremely consumptive of energy and chemicals. Sorting the good material from the bad would effectively reduce required resources by leaving behind the bad material and only transporting and processing the good material. We use a relational influence diagram with an explicit utility model applied to the scenario in which an un-known number of rocks in unknown positions with un-known mineral compositions pass over 7 sensors toward 7 diverters on a high-throughput rock-sorting machine developed by MineSenseTM Technologies Ltd. After re-ceiving noisy sensor data, the system has 400 ms to de-cide whether to activate diverters which will divert the

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)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207