MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W968045710 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511794797

Artificial Intelligence

2010· book· en· W968045710 on OpenAlexaff
David Poole, Alan K. Mackworth

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet of Things and AI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceField (mathematics)AppealGraduate studentsArtificial intelligenceScience and engineeringApplications of artificial intelligenceSpace (punctuation)Representation (politics)SightStyle (visual arts)Mathematics educationEngineeringEngineering ethicsPsychologyPedagogyMathematicsVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent decades have witnessed the emergence of artificial intelligence as a serious science and engineering discipline. This textbook, aimed at junior to senior undergraduate students and first-year graduate students, presents artificial intelligence (AI) using a coherent framework to study the design of intelligent computational agents. By showing how basic approaches fit into a multidimensional design space, readers can learn the fundamentals without losing sight of the bigger picture. The book balances theory and experiment, showing how to link them intimately together, and develops the science of AI together with its engineering applications. Although structured as a textbook, the book's straightforward, self-contained style will also appeal to a wide audience of professionals, researchers, and independent learners. AI is a rapidly developing field: this book encapsulates the latest results without being exhaustive and encyclopedic. The text is supported by an online learning environment, AIspace, http://aispace.org, so that students can experiment with the main AI algorithms plus problems, animations, lecture slides, and a knowledge representation system, AIlog, for experimentation and problem solving.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.026

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations415
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicInternet of Things and AIFrench-language works237,207