MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7101129976

Match-making in bartering scenarios

2005· article· en· W7101129976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBarterDelegateTree (set theory)Representation (politics)Search engine indexingControl (management)Process (computing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis extends tree similarity based match-making from the buyer/seller situa-tion to a scenario of bilateral bartering and multi-agent ring bartering. It is built on top of the AgentMatcher tree similarity algorithm for node-labelled, arc-labelled, arc-weighted trees. A representation of these trees in a multi-dimensional space is developed to allow efficient indexing and pruning in large tree databases. The con-cept of risk is introduced to control the process of bartering ring construction. We have tested our system on the Teclantic.ca portal, where it allows researchers and companies from Atlantic Canada to share technologies as well as to be contacted by investors. ii Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to express my appreciation to my supervisors, Dr. Virendra C. Bhavsar and Dr. Harold Boley, who gave me a great deal of support throughout my time at UNB. They continuously contributed their time, effort and thought in guiding and helping me during the research and writing of this thesis. Also, I am grateful to the Faculty of Computer Science for their support, and to my thesis committee members. Special thanks go to Ms. Linda Sales and all her administrative colleagues for their direction and help, and to all system support staff for their technical assistance. I also thank the AgentMatcher research group for their support and advice. In particular, I also thank Mr. Lu Yang and Mr. Marcel Ball whose work predates my own, and who helped me understanding their accomplishments. Finally, I am grateful to all other people in the Faculty of Computer Science who have assisted me in the course of this work. iii

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207