MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

2019 3rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Automation and Control Technologies (AIACT 2019)

2019· article· en· W4252646128 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Data Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperityAutomationControl (management)Engineering ethicsEngineering managementArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceLibrary scienceEngineeringOperations researchPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREFACE 2019 3rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Automation and Control Technologies (AIACT 2019) was held in Xi’an, China from April 25 to 27, 2019. AIACT 2019 was co-organized by is organized by Xidian University and Hong Kong Society of Mechanical Engineers, sponsored by York University and Fudan University. The conference provides a useful and wide platform both for display the latest research and for exchange of research results and thoughts in Artificial Intelligence, Automation and Control Technologies and other topics. The participants of the conference were from almost every part of the world, with background of either academia or industry, even well-known enterprise. The success and prosperity of the conference is reflected high level of the papers received. The proceedings are a compilation of the accepted papers and represent an interesting outcome of the conference. There were 332 submissions including 293 papers and 39 abstracts. After rigorous peer review, 116 papers and 15 abstracts were accepted. This book covers 3 chapters: Artificial Intelligence; Design and Applications of Artificial Intelligence; Automatic Control. We would like to acknowledge all of those who supported AIACT 2019. Each individual and institutional help were very important for the success of this conference. Especially we would like to thank the organizing committee for their valuable advices in the organization and helpful peer review of the papers. We sincerely hope that AIACT 2019 will be a forum for excellent discussions that will put forward new ideas and promote collaborative researches. We are sure that the proceedings will serve as an important research source of references and the knowledge, which will lead to not only scientific and engineering progress but also other new products and processes. Prof. Dan Zhang, York University, Canada Prof. Xuechao Duan, Xidian University, China

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1500.137

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAdvanced Data Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207