MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410632569 · doi:10.1145/3701716.3717658

Workshop on Sustainable AI for the Future Web

2025· article· en· W4410632569 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chang Xu, Yunke Wang, Jianyuan Guo, Daochang Liu, Yasmeen George, Johan Barthélemy, Yan Liu, Ling Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WollongongCarnegie Mellon UniversityUniversity of Southern CaliforniaInstitute for Catastrophic Loss ReductionNvidiaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AI has been widely integrated into web applications, and has revolutionized user experiences by enabling personalized services, optimizing decision-making and enhancing productivity. However, AI for the web application also poses significant sustainability challenges. AI models rely heavily on vast amounts of web data, consuming substantial computational resources and energy, while the proliferation of AI-generated content risks polluting the web with low-quality information and misinformation. This degradation of data quality threatens the robustness, fairness, and trustworthiness of AI systems, raising concerns about security, bias, and equitable outcomes across diverse user groups. Therefore, we propose this workshop that aims to advance research in sustainable AI for the web, focusing on energy-efficient, socially equitable, and technically robust AI models. By fostering interdisciplinary collaboration among AI, environmental science and social sciences experts, the workshop seeks to develop innovative solutions that ensure AI's long-term positive impact on the web.

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)0.006
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.010

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.253
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

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207