A bibliometric review of machine learning applications in multidomain operations: a decade of progress
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-domain operations have grown in complexity with the integration of diverse operational theaters such as land, air, sea, space, and cyberspace. Artificial intelligence and machine learning have become essential tools for enhancing decision-making, operational planning, and autonomous system management in this evolving defense landscape. This paper presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of AI and ML applications in multi-domain operations from 2013 to 2024. Data were gathered from multiple academic databases and analyzed using VOSviewer, which enabled the mapping of keyword co-occurrences, citation networks, and influential research clusters. The analysis identified thematic clusters that encompass foundational AI/ML techniques, advanced algorithmic innovations such as adversarial and federated learning, optimization methodologies, deep learning frameworks, and systems supporting command and control. Emerging trends also include cybersecurity integration and human-machine teaming, underscoring the dynamic evolution of the field. These findings offer critical insights into the intellectual structure of research at the intersection of technology and military strategy. They provide a foundation for future studies aimed at developing secure, adaptive, and efficient AI-driven systems capable of addressing the challenges inherent in complex, multi-domain environments.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.099 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it