MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239100792 · doi:10.1145/1082983.1082968

xTAO

2005· article· en· W4239100792 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceModeling languageSoftware engineeringExtensibilityXMLContext (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Human–computer interactionProgramming languageSystems engineeringSoftwareWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on software agents has produced a diversity of conceptual models for high-level abstract descriptions of multi-agent systems (MASs). However, it is still difficult and costly for designers that need a unique set of agent modeling features to either develop a new agent modeling language from scratch or undertake the task of modifying an existing language. In addition to the modeling itself, in both cases a significant effort needs to be expended in building or adapting tools to support the language. An extensible agent modeling language is crucial to experimenting with and building tools for novel modeling constructs that arise from evolving research. Existing approaches typically support a basic set of modeling constructs very well, but adapt to others poorly. A declarative language such as XML and its supporting tools provides an ideal platform upon which to develop an extensible modeling language for multi-agent systems. In this paper we describe xTAO, an extensible agent modeling language, and also demonstrate its value in the context of a real-world application.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.211 · 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