MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402263290 · doi:10.62973/12-119r1

OWS-9: OGC Mobile Apps: Definition, Requirements, and Information Architecture

2013· report· en· W4402263290 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEngineering and Information Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDefence Science and Technology GroupNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Army Corps of EngineersDefence Science and Technology LaboratoryNational Geospatial-Intelligence AgencyFederal Aviation AdministrationU.S. Geological SurveyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsArchitectureComputer scienceMobile appsWorld Wide WebInformation retrievalGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This engineering report represents the results of the OWS-9 innovations thread on mobile applications.Initially, the goal was to help understanding the requirements for developing standards-based geospatially-enabled mobile applications.The report describes how OGC Enabled Mobile Apps can be integrated into information architectures based on OGC standards.Particular emphasize has been put on the future work section, as it provides valuable recommendations for further standardization work (and, equally important, highlights aspects that could be excluded from standardization) Keywords ogcdoc, ows9, mobile apps, geopackage, ows context, architecture What is OGC Web Services 9 (OWS-9)?OWS-9 builds on the outcomes of prior OGC interoperability initiatives and is organized around the following threads: -Aviation: Develop and demonstrate the use of the Aeronautical Information Exchange Model (AIXM) and the Weather Exchange Model (WXXM) in an OGC Web Services environment, focusing on support for several Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) project requirements as well as FAA (US Federal Aviation Administration) Aeronautical Information Management (AIM) and Aircraft Access to SWIM (System Wide Information Management) (AAtS) requirements.-Cross-Community Interoperability (CCI): Build on the CCI work accomplished in OWS-8 by increasing interoperability within communities sharing geospatial data, focusing on semantic mediation, query results delivery, data provenance and quality and Single Point of Entry Global Gazetteer.-Security and Services Interoperability (SSI): Investigate 5 main activities:

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicEngineering and Information TechnologyFrench-language works237,207