MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099263243 · doi:10.1115/detc2001/cie-21291

Exploration of a Multi-User Collaborative Assembly Environment on the Internet: A Case Study

2001· article· en· W3099263243 on OpenAlexaff
Li Chen, Zhijie Song, Billy Liavas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceThe InternetSession (web analytics)Collaborative softwareWorld Wide WebData sharingProduct (mathematics)Information sharingMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Real-time collaboration systems, in which participants share product data and applications in real time, have been a subject of interest for many years. Nowadays, a rapid development of Internet-based technologies with steadily increasing easiness in accessing any kind of information through the World Wide Web (WWW) would offer the possibility of developing a real-time collaborative system over the Internet. Two strategies are required to create such a system. One strategy is finding effective methods for communicating and sharing distributed product information, especially those related to design and manufacturing. Another strategy is developing Web-based approaches that support real-time sharing of platform-independent applications. In this paper, a concept for a multi-user collaborative assembly environment on the Internet is presented. The Client/Server structure of the environment, and the four main functional modules including: 1) integration and sharing of distributed product data through a STEP server; 2) session management including team management, user management and access control; 3) sharing of multimedia data (e.g. text, audio and video); 4) 3D collaborative assembly, are described. Finally, a scenario has been designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the environment to support distributed collaborative assembly design.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207