MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308314580 · doi:10.54691/bcpbm.v31i.2540

The Impact of Autopilot on Tesla

2022· article· en· W4308314580 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

VenueBCP Business & Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutopilotReputationRevenueField (mathematics)Computer scienceEmerging technologiesBusinessAeronauticsRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringAerospace engineeringFinancePolitical scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Tesla advances in technology, Tesla is expeditiously embarking on exploring an emerging field, driverless technology. Due to the current instability of driverless technology, driverless systems are not commonly used at the moment. Nevertheless, its impact on Tesla can not be neglected. Therefore, this study focuses on the impact of the emergence of autonomous driving on Tesla. Specifically, this paper explores the impact brought about by autonomous driving by collecting statistical data, gathering real-life cases, and analyzing the information. However, the research illustrates that Tesla’s Autopilot is a double-edged sword. It damages the reputation of Tesla while offering the huge potential for gaining tremendous revenue in the present and future. In the long run, the scales are tipped in favor of autonomous driving technology. Thus, persisting in exploring the field of driverless technology will speed up the promotion of Tesla.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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