MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136176769 · doi:10.5555/2872518.3251208

Session details: Demonstrations

2016· article· en· W3136176769 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alfredo Cuzzocrea, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Web Conference · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)World Wide WebComputer scienceCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you to the Demo Track of WWW 2016, The 25th International World Wide Web Conference, held in Montreal, Canada, during April 11-15, 2016.The WWW 2016 Demo Track, like in the tradition of WWW Demo conference series, allows researchers and practitioners to demonstrate new systems in a dedicated session. Demo contributions are based on an implemented and tested system that pursues one or more innovative ideas in the interest areas of Web data and information management, Web search, Web intelligence tools, Web mining, social network applications and so forth. Topics of interest for the 2016 edition's conference include (but are not limited to) the following ones: Behavioral Analysis and PersonalizationBig Data on the WebCrowdsourcing Systems and Social MediaContent AnalysisGraph Data Management and MiningHigh-Performance Infrastructures for Data- Intensive Web TasksInternet Economics and MonetizationPervasive Web and MobilitySecurity and PrivacySemantic WebSocial Networks and Graph AnalysisWeb Information RetrievalWeb Infrastructure: Datacenters, Content Delivery Networks, and Cloud ComputingWeb MiningWeb ScienceWeb Search Systems and ApplicationsDemo contributions come from academic researchers, industrial practitioners with prototypes or inproduction deployments, as well as from any W3C-related activities. All have in common to show innovative use of Web-based techniques.The WWW 2016 Demo Track call for papers attracted 65 submissions from all over the world (USA, North America, South America, Europe, Australia, Asia, Africa). The program committee reviewed and accepted a very selected collection of 29 papers, and the final statistics is the following: WWW 2016 Demo Track Statistics Number of Submitted Papers 65 Number of Accepted Papers 29.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Web ConferenceSame topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207