Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 33/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
technology ai startup agenda agenda analysis
IAAI - IAAI-22 - IAAI-22 Conference Schedule
This technology ai startup agenda in Technology / AI / Startup shows 25 visible agenda rows from aaai-2022.virtualchair.net and scores 33/100: a thin but inspectable design signal. The clearest public signals sit in Learning Transfer and Participation Architecture; the main limits are Follow Through and Network Design. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, and Learning transfer. The public record does not show follow-up or tracking, so the score should be read as design intent... A practical reading: For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as a technology ai startup agenda, with the strongest visible signal in learning transfer and participation architecture and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence. This page is an original public-evidence analysis, not a copy of the source agenda or an endorsement of the event. The score places the visible agenda in the thin outcome architecture band. The strongest visible pillars are Learning Transfer, Participation Architecture, and Future-of-Work Fit; the thinnest visible pillars are Follow Through, Network Design, and Evidence Maturity. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, Learning transfer, and Personalization. The extracted agenda preview includes 25 visible rows. The most common formats are Poster Session, Panel, and Presentation; the most common inferred purposes are Showcase, Deliberation, and Knowledge Transfer.
Eight-pillar fingerprint
Hover any pillar to see what it measures and, where it scored low, what the agenda is missing.
Participation Architecture?54
Participation Architecture - 54/100. Participant work, contribution, interaction, and alternatives to passive broadcast.
Follow Through?5
Follow Through - 5/100. Owners, dates, commitments, progress checks, and accountability after the room.Missing: Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
Problem Specificity?47
Problem Specificity - 47/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.
Personalization?40
Personalization - 40/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.
Network Design?16
Network Design - 16/100. Structured weak ties, bridge-building, mixers, and relationship persistence.Missing: Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
Learning Transfer?58
Learning Transfer - 58/100. Applied practice, feedback, workplace use, refreshers, and 30-90 day transfer.
Evidence Maturity?38
Evidence Maturity - 38/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.Missing: Add baseline measurement, comparison logic, tracking, or post-event impact reporting so effectiveness is not inferred only from format.
Future-of-Work Fit?48
Future-of-Work Fit - 48/100. Value against time, hybrid reality, accessibility, AI, and meeting load.
Fix the gaps
Field-tested exercises matched to this agenda's weakest pillars, from the exercise library.
Follow Through (5/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Mental Toughness Workshop • WorkshopBank · 15% Solutions • WorkshopBank · Network Patches
Network Design (16/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Fun Trust-Building Group Game for Team Connection - Izzat... · Exciting Group Trust Activity for Building Confidence... · PFP: September 2005
Personalization (40/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Journey Mapping • WorkshopBank · Group Energiser & Perspective-Changing Exercise - Paradigm... · Photo Storytelling
Agenda Preview
The actual agenda we captured. Every block is classified by format and purpose. Open any block to see how we read it; the colored edge shows whether it is participant work, broadcast, logistics, or a showcase.
Room vs wrapper
12 percent of the 25 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventIAAI EAAI Tutorials Workshops Poster Sessions Oral Presentations Doctoral/Undergraduate Consortiums Student Abstracts Demonstrations Social / Diversity & Inclusion Senior Members TrackWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe Thirty-Fourth Annual Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (IAAI-22) is a venue for papers describing highly innovative realizations of AI technology. The objective of the conference is to showcase successful applications and novel uses of AI. The conference will use technical papers, best practice papers, invited talks, and panel discussions to explore issues, methods, and lessons learned in the development and deployment of AI applications; and to promote an interchange of ideas between basic and applied AI and the discourse on the actual deployment of AI in practice.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI Poster Session 1: Ecology, Commerce, and TransportationPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPosters appearing in this session are listed below.Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI AI in Practice Panel 1: From Keyboard to Bedside: Connecting AI Solutions to Health Care ProblemsPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPanelists: David Buckeridge, Professor, McGill University; Chief Digital Health Officer, McGill University Health Centre; Associate Member, Mila; Maxim Topaz, Elizabeth Standish Gill Associate Professor of Nursing, Columbia University Medical Center; Peter Liu, Chief Scientific Officer and VP of Research, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Professor of Medicine and Physiology, University of Toronto and University of OttawaPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
12:00{ "name":"IAAI-22 Robert S. Engelmore Memorial Lecture Award: Andrew Ng, "The Data-Centric AI".", "description":"", "startDate":"02-24-2022", "endDate":"02-24-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red Plenary Room", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI Poster Session 2: Healthcare, Tools, Finance/Insurance, and DesignPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
09:00{ "name":"IAAI Poster Session 2: Healthcare, Tools, Finance/Insurance, and Design", "description":"", "startDate":"02-25-2022", "endDate":"02-25-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventEMER127 Combating Sampling Bias: A Self-Training Method in Credit Risk Models (Jingxian Liao, Wei Wang, Jason Xue, Anthony Lei, Xue Han, Kun Lu).TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventTOOL94 AI Explainability 360: Impact and Design (Vijay Arya, Rachel K. E. Bellamy, Pin-Yu Chen, Amit Dhurandhar, Michael Hind, Samuel C. Hoffman, Stephanie Houde, Q. Vera Liao, Ronny Luss, Aleksandra Mojsilovic, Sami Mourad, Pablo Pedemonte, Ramya Raghavendra, John T. Richards, Prasanna Sattigeri, Karthikeyan Shanmugam, Moninder Singh, Kush R. Varshney, Dennis Wei, Yunfeng Zhang).DemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI AI in Practice Panel 2: The Commercialization of AI in HealthPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
10:45{ "name":"IAAI AI in Practice Panel 2: The Commercialization of AI in Health", "description":"", "startDate":"02-25-2022", "endDate":"02-25-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPanelists: Jeffrey De Flavio, Partner and Entrepreneur-in-Residence at AlleyCorp, Co-Founder & Executive Chairman (Diana Health, Affect Therapeutics, and Pearl Health); Jeff Chang, Co-Founder & CPO (Rad AI); Yinhan Liu, Co-founder & CTO (Birch.AI)PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI Poster Session 3: Monitoring and Control, NLP and Documents, CybersecurityPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
08:45{ "name":"IAAI Poster Session 3: Monitoring and Control, NLP and Documents, Cybersecurity", "description":"", "startDate":"02-26-2022", "endDate":"02-26-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI AI in Practice Panel 3: Applications and Implications of Deep AI for Personalizing Health InterventionsPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
10:30{ "name":"IAAI AI in Practice Panel 3: Applications and Implications of Deep AI for Personalizing Health Interventions", "description":"", "startDate":"02-26-2022", "endDate":"02-26-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPanelists: Shamim Nemati, Director, Predictive Health Analytics, UC San Diego Health, Department of Biomedical Informatics; James Zou, Assistant Professor, Stanford University, Faculty Director, Stanford AI4Health; Corey Arnold, Professor,PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI Poster Session 4: Commerce, Transportation, Tools, Finance/Insurance, Design, NLP and Documents, CybersecurityPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
16:45{ "name":"IAAI Poster Session 4: Commerce, Transportation, Tools, Finance/Insurance, Design, NLP and Documents, Cybersecurity", "description":"", "startDate":"02-26-2022", "endDate":"02-26-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
18:30{ "name":"IAAI Oral Presentations 4: E-Commerce and the Web", "description":"", "startDate":"02-26-2022", "endDate":"02-26-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }PresentationKnowledge Transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIAAI Poster Session 5: Ecology, Healthcare, Monitoring and ControlPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
00:45{ "name":"IAAI Poster Session 5: Ecology, Healthcare, Monitoring and Control", "description":"", "startDate":"02-27-2022", "endDate":"02-27-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
02:30{ "name":"IAAI Oral Presentations 5: Web Search and Healthcare", "description":"", "startDate":"02-27-2022", "endDate":"02-26-2022", "startTime": " ", "endTime": " ", "location": "Red 6", "timeZone": "US/Pacific", "options":[ "Apple", "Google", "iCal", "Microsoft365", "Outlook.com", "Yahoo" ] }PresentationKnowledge Transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 38/100 and verified 38/100 with no fourth-loop cap.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as a technology ai startup agenda, with the strongest visible signal in learning transfer and participation architecture and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence.
Strongest signals: Learning Transfer, Participation Architecture, and Future-of-Work Fit. Weakest signals: Follow Through, Network Design, and Evidence Maturity.
How This Agenda Could Improve +
- Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
- Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
- Add baseline measurement, comparison logic, tracking, or post-event impact reporting so effectiveness is not inferred only from format.
Fastest next move: Add named owners, dated next steps, and a visible continuation path before treating the event as outcome-ready.
Role-Specific Reading +
Sponsor lens
Look beyond exposure. Strong sponsor value would show qualified interaction, problem work, buyer learning, customer evidence, or follow-up. The practical sponsor move is to look for structured introductions, buyer-seller fit, and relationship persistence.
Designer lens
The agenda is useful as a pattern sample from aaai-2022.virtualchair.net. Redesign attention should go first to the lowest-scoring pillars; in practice, turn the thinnest agenda blocks into participant work.
Executive lens
Treat the visible agenda as an operating plan. The executive move is to require owners, dates, and evidence before treating the event as strategic. If owners, proof, and follow-through are not visible, the public record does not yet prove strategic movement.
Aggregator lens
Treat the source URL as evidence, not decoration. The data-product move is to label the source boundary clearly before ranking the record before ranking or syndicating the record.
What GES Means Here +
The Gathering Effectiveness Score is a strict 0-100 public-evidence reading of the agenda across eight pillars. It rewards visible participant work, follow-through, transfer, network design, and proof mechanisms more than polish, speaker fame, attendance, or satisfaction.
Visible mechanisms: Participant work, Feedback, Network design, Learning transfer, Personalization.
Evidence boundary: Scores reflect visible agenda/source evidence and should not be read as proof of causal event impact.
Limitations, Score Caps, and Review Flags +
Limitations
- No visible follow-up, progress monitoring, or longitudinal tracking.
- No baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- No fourth-loop score cap applied.
Review flags
- No source-backed follow-up, validation, baseline, tracking, or impact evidence.
Is this proof the event worked? +
No. This is a strict public-evidence reading of the agenda. Proof would require baseline, comparison, follow-up, attribution, and impact evidence beyond the listing.
What should a reader inspect first? +
Start with the source URL, then compare the eight pillar scores against the agenda rows. The biggest opportunities usually sit in follow-through, evidence maturity, and participant work.
Why publish weak records? +
Weak records are part of the map. They show where public agendas still describe sessions and speakers more often than outcomes, commitments, transfer, or proof.
How should I use the rows? +
Read the agenda rows as the visible design trace: formats, purposes, and evidence labels show what the public source made inspectable, not everything that happened in the room. This is a source-grounded interpretation of the public agenda record, not a copy of the source, and not an endorsement of the event.
Embed the verified badge +
This record is in the hand-verified gold set. Copy the snippet below to embed the verified badge on your own site.
<a href="https://unitedwetransform.com/events/evt_2022_aaai_org_conference_aaai_iaai_iaai_22_iaai_22_conference_schedule_aaai_2022"><img src="https://unitedwetransform.com/badge/ges-verified.svg" alt="GES verified by United We Transform" height="40"></a>Where To Go Next
Compare this agenda against other Technology / AI / Startup events scored on the same eight pillars.