MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283166472 · doi:10.1007/s44163-022-00027-3

Systems of collaboration: challenges and solutions for interdisciplinary research in AI and social robotics

2022· article· en· W4283166472 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

VenueDiscover Artificial Intelligence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityProfessional Engineers Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceRoboticsPerspective (graphical)Computer scienceKnowledge managementSociologyEngineering ethicsRobotData scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines the challenges and opportunities that arise when engaging with research across disciplines, contributing to the growth of social robotics and artificially intelligent systems. Artificial intelligence has a significant role to play in human–machine communication; however, there are barriers to its adoption and considerations towards systematic implementation for the good of people and societies. This perspective piece considers the position of artificial intelligence in systems of human–machine communication. The study of artificial intelligent systems is one of discovery, trial, and error through a melting pot of methodologies, and this interdisciplinary nature is explored through the perspective of researchers at the centre of collaboration coming from artificial intelligence, robotics, and communication.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.357
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.150 · 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