MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253994809 · doi:10.1109/mra.2015.2452199

2015 Humanitarian Robotics and Automation Technology Challenge [Humanitarian Technology]

2015· article· en· W4253994809 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Raj Madhavan, Lino Marques, Edson Prestes, Renan Maffei, Vítor Oliveira Jorge, Baptiste Gil, Sedat Dogru, Gonçalo Cabrita, Renata Neuland, Prithviraj Dasgupta

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsRoboticsAutomationArtificial intelligenceEngineeringRobotComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Presents information on the RASS 2015 Humanitarian Robotics and Automation Technology Challenge.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.042

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.303 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics & Automation MagazineSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207