MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094666788

PERANCANGAN PERANGKAT LUNAK VISUALISASI ALGORITMA GREEDY

2019· article· id· W3094666788 on OpenAlexaff
Andy Paul Harianja

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicEdcuational Technology Systems
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGreedy algorithmVisualizationSoftwareGreedy randomized adaptive search procedureTheoretical computer scienceComputer graphics (images)AlgorithmData miningProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visualization Software Design Greedy Algorithm is a depiction planning of software with engineering in making images, diagrams or animations to display an information in the form of a logical and systematic arrangement to solve a problem by finding the optimum solution.  The goal is to create a visualization software design program that can optimize the preparation of goods in containers and their completion steps so as to facilitate problem solving, especially in real life. Greedy algorithm to solve the problem step by step or step by step, that every step will take the best option which can be obtained at the time ata get a solution quickly on the same day. The Greedy Algorithm will be used to find the optimum solution for the preparation of goods in containers that will get the most optimal results especially to reduce empty space. Goods are arranged according to height, width and length. Making visualizations developed using software is an effective way to help users to better understand and be able to learn independently. Keywords: design, visualization, algorithm, greedy

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.012

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreSoftware

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEdcuational Technology SystemsFrench-language works237,207