MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7098524161

Multi-modal Scene Understanding Using Probabilistic Models

2001· article· en· W7098524161 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanHappeningTerrorismJoint (building)Set (abstract data type)Research center
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First, I would like to especially thank my advisor, Prof. Gerhard Sagerer, for his openminded support, continual encouragement, and fruitful discussions. His way of mediating experiences beyond technical aspects of research was very inspiring for me. I enjoyed many joint conference visits with him and the cooperative organization of the workshop “Integration of Speech and Image Understanding ” which was associated with the International Conference of Computer Vision 1999. Secondly, I very much acknowledge Prof. Sven Dickinson from the University of Toronto for being the second reviewer in my thesis committee. His comments encourage me to continue research in this area. I have to thank Enno Ohlebusch for his offhanded readiness to substitute Prof. Dickinson during my defence who had to cancel his flight because of the terrorist attack happening in New York, Sept. 2001. The present thesis was embedded in the Collaborative Research Center 360 “Situated Artificial Communicators ” that has been funded by the German Research Foundation. I joined the research project “Interaktion sprachlicher und visueller Informationsverarbeitung” (Interaction of speech and image processing) for three exciting and inspiring

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmphibian and Reptile Biology→French-language works237,207→