MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402264853 · doi:10.62973/12-105

OGC OWS-9 - OWS Context evaluation IP Engineering Report

2013· report· en· W4402264853 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
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
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This OGC Engineering Report describes the results of the OWS-9 IP on OWS Context 1.0.OWS Context is a draft OGC candidate standard.The OWS Context activity tested and evaluated the relative benefits of different encoding methods prior to finalization of the candidate standard.OWS Context has been proposed with an Atom encoding, a JSON encoding and an HTML5 encoding.The encoding requirement seeks to understand the level of mass-market acceptance of these different encoding options and their ability to support mash-ups.Each encoding should be evaluated, including examples and recommendations to move forward.Recommendations should enable the OWS Context capability for OGC services while remaining cognizant of implementations using massmarket technologies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.247 · 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