MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055202121

Colloque S&T Symposium 2008: Understanding the Human Dimension in 21st Century Conflict/Warfare: The Complexities of Human-with-Human Relationships

2008· article· en· W7055202121 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattlespaceGeneral partnershipHuman DimensionTheme (computing)AdversaryAdversarial systemPreparednessDimension (graph theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of Defence S&T Symposium 2008 -- part two of a three year series -- was to further explore human-centric conflict issues. The 2007 Symposium challenged the S&T community to address these issues, which were captured within three conflict domains: Person-versus-Person, Person-versus-Nature, and Person-versus-Self. For 2008, the domain of Person-with-Person Partnership that focuses on a holistic approach to conflict resolution was added. Defence S&T Symposium 2008 "peeled back the onion" and presented leading research that is beginning to resolve human-centric issues in the new and future security environment. Canada and the Canadian Forces have an unfamiliar adversary in a battlespace largely governed by ideology. There is an urgent requirement to improve the preparedness and protection of our frontline combatants, and we need an actionable understanding of the multi-organizational response to conflict. These three challenges define the key themes for this Symposium. Theme 1: Adversarial Intent. Theme 2: Understanding the 'Influence' Battlespace. Theme 3: Human Complexity. Any one of these thematic challenges seems daunting, but important advances have been made. The Defence S&T Symposium 2008 highlighted the state-of-the-art research in these areas with representation from defence and security, academia, and industry. The paradigm has shifted, and research in the new and future security environment is responding in kind. Conclusions that emerged over the course of the two days reinforced the fact that the battlespace has changed. No longer are military operations about winning the next high intensity battle; they are about establishing the conditions for self-sustaining stability. By working towards the development of models and concepts to better understand and influence the human in the battlespace, the S&T community should be well positioned to enable an agile and adaptive Canadian Forces.

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)0.004
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.005

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207