MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205277377 · doi:10.2196/preprints.27283

Chloe for COVID-19: Evolution of an Intelligent Conversational Agent to Address Infodemic Management Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic (Preprint)

2021· preprint· en· W4205277377 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sophia Siedlikowski, Louis-Philippe Noël, Stephanie Anne Moynihan, Marc R. Robin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChatbotCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicPreprintComputer sciencePublic healthKnowledge managementProcess (computing)ScalabilityBusinessInternet privacyData scienceWorld Wide WebMedicineNursingDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNSTRUCTURED There is an unprecedented demand for infodemic management due to rapidly evolving information about the novel COVID-19 pandemic. This viewpoint paper details the evolution of a Canadian digital information tool, Chloe for COVID-19, based on incremental leveraging of artificial intelligence techniques. By providing an accessible summary of Chloe’s development, we show how proactive cooperation between health, technology, and corporate sectors can lead to a rapidly scalable, safe, and secure virtual chatbot to assist public health efforts in keeping Canadians informed. We then highlight Chloe’s strengths, the challenges we faced during the development process, and future directions for the role of chatbots in infodemic management. The information presented here may guide future collaborative efforts in health technology in order to enhance access to accurate and timely health information to the public.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablemedium
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Software
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Software

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→