Exploration of a Multi-User Collaborative Assembly Environment on the Internet: A Case Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it