On Future Development of Autonomous Systems: A Report of the Plenary Panel at IEEE ICAS’21
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomous Systems (AS) are perceived as the most advanced intelligent systems evolved from those of reflexive, imperative, and adaptive intelligence. A plenary panel on “Future Development of Autonomous Systems” is organized at the inaugural IEEE ICAS’21. This paper reports the panel discussions about the-state-of-the-art and paradigms of AS, the basic research on theoretical foundations and mathematical means of AS, and challenges to the future development of AS. As an emerging and increasingly demanded field, AS provide an unprecedented approach to contemporary intelligent industries including deep machine learning, highly intelligent robotics, cognitive computers, general AI technologies, and industrial applications enabled by transdisciplinary advances in intelligence science, system science, brain science, cognitive science, robotics, computational intelligence, and intelligent mathematics.
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 | 0.022 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.012 |
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.
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".