MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Program

2022· article· en· W4308238721 on OpenAlexaff
Sreeraman Rajan, Khaled A. Helal Kelany, Clemens P. J. Adolphs, Amirali Baniasadi, Ian Goode, Carlos E. Saavedra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaCarleton UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNISTComputer scienceProcess (computing)Relation (database)Quality (philosophy)Engineering managementCompatibility (geochemistry)EngineeringDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

meta-learning.Specifically, we will introduce three lines of meta-learning methods, i.e., gradient-based methods, metrics-based methods, and memory-based methods.Furthermore, we will also present the application of meta-learning in real-world systems such as smart grids and transportation systems.Finally, we will discuss the challenges and potential research directions. T2: Tutorial 2 -Introduction to Codes and StandardsNehad El-Sherif Room: Harbour Suites B Codes and Standards are indispensable because of the essential role they play in our lives.They touch every aspect of our lives by ensuring safety, quality and reliability of products and services.Additionally, codes and standards guarantee compatibility between different markets to facilitate international trade.According to Raymond G. Kammer, the past director of the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), about 80% of global merchandise trade is affected by standards and by regulations that embody standards.Therefore, it is important to understand the standards development process, the different types of standards, and how to become actively involved in the development process.This tutorial provides attendees having little or no background of codes and standards with the information required to develop a basic understanding of the topic.It also serves as a refresher for experienced attendees.The 5W's method will be used to engage attendees and historical examples to emphasize the importance of complying with codes and standards.Innovation and its relation to standards will be discussed.Finally, a real-life design example will be shared with attendees to demonstrate how codes and standards are applied in practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2320.097

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207