Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 42/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
applied learning or working session agenda analysis
ICML - WCA4Z Platform - Accelerating Legacy Code Modernization Using AI Agents, Deep Program Analysis, and - 2026 - Workshops - Expo Talks, Demos...
This applied learning or working session in Trade Show / Expo shows 26 visible agenda rows from icml.cc and scores 42/100: a moderate design signal with incomplete evidence. The clearest public signals sit in Participation Architecture and Problem Specificity; the main limits are Follow Through and Network Design. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Impact evidence, and Network design. Follow-through or tracking is at least visible enough to inspect, though causal proof still depends on... A practical reading: For a reader, this is a useful but still incomplete public example: it reads as an applied learning or working session, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and problem specificity and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to execution quality beyond the public agenda. 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 moderate design signal band. The strongest visible pillars are Participation Architecture, Problem Specificity, and Learning Transfer; the thinnest visible pillars are Follow Through, Network Design, and Personalization. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Impact evidence, Network design, and Learning transfer. The extracted agenda preview includes 43 visible rows. The most common formats are Workshop, Poster Session, and Presentation; the most common inferred purposes are Showcase, Co Creation, 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?64
Participation Architecture - 64/100. 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?61
Problem Specificity - 61/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.
Personalization?44
Personalization - 44/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.Missing: Create role-based paths, prepared questions, tailored breakouts, or participant-specific next steps.
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?47
Evidence Maturity - 47/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.
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 (44/100)
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
44 percent of the 43 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventTutorialsTrainingSkill building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventSpotlight PostersPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
all eventPosition Paper PostersPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
all eventJournal Track PostersPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventExpo Talks, Demos, and WorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventExpo Talk PanelPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, HALL D2PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventStrands Robots: Unifying Robot Control, Simulation, and Training Behind Natural LanguageTrainingSkill building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, HALL B2PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, auditoriumPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, HALL D1PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:30 AM - 12:30 PMJul 6, HALL CPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventThe session will conclude with a panel discussion focusing onPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventExpo DemonstrationDemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
12:30 PM - 2:30 PMJul 6, grand ballroom foyerPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventExpo WorkshopWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventTutorialsTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSpotlight PostersPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPosition Paper PostersPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventJournal Track PostersPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventExpo Talks, Demos, and WorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventExpo Talk PanelPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, HALL D2UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventStrands Robots: Unifying Robot Control, Simulation, and Training Behind Natural LanguageTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, HALL B2UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, AUDITORIUMUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
8:00 AM - 9:00 AMJul 6, HALL D1UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:30 AM - 12:30 PMJul 6, HALL CUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWe will briefly introduce the core technical ideas behind SWM -- including cross-temporal pairing, synthetic trajectory augmentation, and the Virtual Lookahead Sink for long-horizon stability -- and demonstrate how these enable controllable, kilometer-scale simulation with realistic geometry, motion, and user-driven scenarios.DemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe session will conclude with a panel discussion focusing on:PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventExpo DemonstrationDemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
12:30 PM - 2:30 PMJul 6, GRAND BALLROOM FOYERUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event3D understanding of the surrounding world is one of the key prerequisites for building truly foundational robotics models. In this demonstration, we will present to the audience some of the latest technologies that address this challenge. We will discuss a wide spectrum of methods ranging from the 3D-aware positional encoding mechanisms in Transformers to Gromov-Wasserstein techniques with geodesic distances. We will provide several robotics applications. The presentation will be complemented with the live demo involving the audience, showing some of the discussed techniques in action.DemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIn this part of the workshop, we will present a new class of methods, called STRING, extending popular RoPE mechanisms, for the 3D-aware positional encodings in Transformers and exactly translation-invariant. We will show their applications ranging from 3D scene understanding to designing robotic policies operating on data with depth information. Presented concepts will be accompanied with the live demo, showing them in action.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventExpo WorkshopWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop teaches a systematic approach to the problem using two open-source IBM tools: Mellea, a Python library for structured LLM generation, and Granite Libraries, a collection of lightweight LoRA adapters that score generated output against developer-defined requirements. Together they implement an Instruct-Validate-Repair loop - generate a response, measure it against your requirements, and select or retry before it reaches the user.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop will examine the methodological questions that arise in building such systems across materials science and biomedicine, including superconducting materials, virtual cells, drug discovery, cell and spatial omics, and proteomics. The discussion will focus on shared challenges in multimodal representation learning, integration of scientific constraints and prior knowledge, planning over tools and experiments, coordination between models and experimental workflows, and evaluation in closed-loop discovery settings.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventBy bringing together researchers working on scientific foundation models and agentic AI, the workshop will provide a forum for discussing technical challenges and emerging research directions in next-generation AI for Science.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIn this workshop, we explore harness engineering in -depth: the discipline of building the runtime infrastructure that wraps a foundation model and turns it into a reliable, production-grade agent and how the same pattern translates to physical AI.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event2. The Components & Why They Matter. We break down the six core components (context management, tool registry, verification loops, state & memory, safety controls, and observability) and show why getting these right matters more than picking the "best" model.BreakWellbeing+
Format · LogisticsBreakA pacing or recovery block between sessions.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event5. Physical AI: The Harness Goes Embodied. We'll cover how a robot's control loop (observe → encode → decide → act → repeat) uses the same harness pattern. We break this down into the core pillars of physical intelligence with real projects cases:BreakWellbeing+
Format · LogisticsBreakA pacing or recovery block between sessions.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 43/100 and verified 43/100 with no fourth-loop cap.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is a useful but still incomplete public example: it reads as an applied learning or working session, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and problem specificity and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to execution quality beyond the public agenda.
Strongest signals: Participation Architecture, Problem Specificity, and Learning Transfer. Weakest signals: Follow Through, Network Design, and Personalization.
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.
- Create role-based paths, prepared questions, tailored breakouts, or participant-specific next steps.
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 icml.cc. 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, Impact evidence, 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 baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- No fourth-loop score cap applied.
Review flags
- No tracking, validation, feedback, or impact measurement found in the visible source text.
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_2026_icml_wca4z_platform_accelerating_legacy_code_modernization_using_ai_agents_26cea1"><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 Trade Show / Expo events scored on the same eight pillars.