Agente conversacional para consultas sobre servicio médico en una clínica privada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Los agentes conversacionales son programas que utilizan procesamiento de lenguaje natural con un sistema de preguntas y respuestas.La investigación tiene como objetivo proponer la implementación de un agente conversacional para consultas más frecuentes en clínicas de salud privadas.El marco conceptual se sustenta a partir de revisión y recopilación de referencias bibliográficas en inglés y español de revistas indexadas, libros, informes de organismos nacionales e internacionales, concerniente al tema, del mismo modo la metodología se construye con aplicaciones de fichas de observación a las 16 clínicas privadas de Ambato (Ecuador), entrevistas a expertos, investigación de proveedores de software.Como evidencia de resultados se prioriza las ventajas de usar un agente conversacional para resolver consultas médicas, por tal motivo, se recomendó un procedimiento metodológico para su implementación que consta de 6 fases: 1. Análisis de cliente potencial, 2. Selección de proveedor, 3. Selección de plataforma de mensajería, 4. Instalación y Configuración, 5. Capacitación y pruebas, 6.Control y Evaluación.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".