PRAGMATICS DRIVEN LAND COVER SERVICE COMPOSITION UTILIZING BEHAVIOR-INTENTION MODEL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Web service composition is one of the key issues to develop a global land cover (GLC) information service portal. Aiming at the defect that traditional syntax and semantic service compositionare difficult to take pragmatic information into account, the paper firstly analyses three tiers of web service language and their succession relations, discusses the conceptual model of pragmatic web service, and proposes the idea of pragmatics-oriented adaptive composition method based on the analysis of some examples. On this basis it puts forward the pragmatic web service model based on Behavior-Intention through presetting and expression of service usability, users' intention, and other pragmatic information, develops the on-demand assembly method based on the agent theory and matching and reconstruction method on heterogeneous message, solves the key technological issue of algorithm applicability and heterogeneous message transformation in the process of covering web service composition on the ground, applies these methods into service combination, puts forward the pragmatic driven service composition method based on behavior-intention model, and effectively settles the issue of coordination and interaction of composite service invocation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".