MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cognitive Informatics and Cognitive Computing in Year 10 and Beyond

2012· book-chapter· en· W4229803259 on OpenAlexaff
Yingxu Wang, Robert C. Berwick, S. Haykin, Witold Pedrycz, Witold Kinsner, George Baciu, Du Zhang, Virendrakumar C. Bhavsar, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive computingInformaticsCognitionEngineering informaticsComputer scienceData scienceCognitive scienceInformation scienceLIDABusiness informaticsArtificial intelligenceHealth informaticsPsychologyCognitive architectureEngineeringLibrary scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive Informatics (CI) is a transdisciplinary enquiry of computer science, information sciences, cognitive science, and intelligence science that investigates into the internal information processing mechanisms and processes of the brain and natural intelligence, as well as their engineering applications in cognitive computing. The latest advances in CI leads to the establishment of cognitive computing theories and methodologies, as well as the development of Cognitive Computers (CogC) that perceive, infer, and learn. This paper reports a set of nine position statements presented in the plenary panel of IEEE ICCI*CC’11 on Cognitive Informatics in Year 10 and Beyond contributed from invited panelists who are part of the world’s renowned researchers and scholars in the field of cognitive informatics and cognitive computing.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicCognitive Computing and NetworksFrench-language works237,207