MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6997101637

Towards the Visualization and Understanding of Diagnoses in a Physical System 1

2008· article· en· W6997101637 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationMedical diagnosisKnowledge baseDomain (mathematical analysis)HeuristicsDomain knowledgeKnowledge-based systemsSchematicHypermedia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diagnosis of physical systems such as car or aircraft engines tends to be a complex activity. Technicians combine textual manuals with schematics and some analysis of measured data to diagnose and repair engines. Knowledge-based system designers have added heuristics to hypermedia (mostly text and graphic) representations of manuals to simplify the tasks of the technicians as in JETA [Halasz91]. Knowledge browsers for such systems are used by the knowledgeengineers to structure and input the knowledge base and in a limited capacity are used to help the domain experts visualize the knowledge and the various possible relations as implemented for the JETA browser. In RATIONALE, a diagnostic system that reasons by explaining, explanation was used to understand the reasoning in the knowledge-based system [Abu-Hakima90]. This position paper argues that although these knowledge-based approaches help in the visualization and understanding of diagnoses in physical systems, they need to be improved and better integrated into an overall diagnostic system. Some of the many issues that arise in trying to achieve this are discussed in the paper.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207