MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323318961 · doi:10.3390/s23052859

Natural Intelligence as the Brain of Intelligent Systems

2023· review· en· W4323318961 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahdi Naghshvarianjahromi, Shiva Kumar, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitive radioRadarFocus (optics)CognitionCommunications systemReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsEngineeringWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the concept and applications of cognitive dynamic systems (CDS), which are a type of intelligent system inspired by the brain. There are two branches of CDS, one for linear and Gaussian environments (LGEs), such as cognitive radio and cognitive radar, and another one for non-Gaussian and nonlinear environments (NGNLEs), such as cyber processing in smart systems. Both branches use the same principle, called the perception action cycle (PAC), to make decisions. The focus of this review is on the applications of CDS, including cognitive radios, cognitive radar, cognitive control, cyber security, self-driving cars, and smart grids for LGEs. For NGNLEs, the article reviews the use of CDS in smart e-healthcare applications and software-defined optical communication systems (SDOCS), such as smart fiber optic links. The results of implementing CDS in these systems are very promising, with improved accuracy, performance, and lower computational costs. For example, CDS implementation in cognitive radars achieved a range estimation error that is as good as 0.47 (m) and a velocity estimation error of 3.30 (m/s), outperforming traditional active radars. Similarly, CDS implementation in smart fiber optic links improved the quality factor by 7 dB and the maximum achievable data rate by 43% compared to those of other mitigation techniques.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207