{"id":"W2058792175","doi":"10.1016/j.artint.2005.09.002","title":"Finding optimal satisficing strategies for and-or trees","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Artificial Intelligence","topic":"Software Testing and Debugging Techniques","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":50,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto; University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Probabilistic logic; Tree (set theory); Set (abstract data type); Node (physics); Computer science; Outcome (game theory); Satisficing; Class (philosophy); Mathematical optimization; Task (project management); Mathematics; Test (biology); Algorithm; Artificial intelligence; Combinatorics; Mathematical economics","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003602173,0.0001272604,0.0001289918,0.00009536944,0.0002307749,0.0003140036,0.0003998347,0.0000515634,0.00001523974],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004386803,0.0001090343,0.00003829261,0.0002128182,0.0000723921,0.0005480224,0.000114428,0.00008312765,0.00001567183],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002326712,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006881064,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00006946571,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001259093,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989613,0.00002134842,0.000283408,0.000336716,0.0001191445,0.0002780771],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986823,0.0008580944,0.00007423992,0.0002593611,0.00006576593,0.00006021692],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"simulation_or_modeling","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001534905,0.00002793228,0.0001200726,0.00001042266,0.000005115665,0.000002387009,0.001779728,0.001404379,0.0006412611,0.236921,0.0008986727,0.7581737],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002079747,0.0002795601,0.0001168659,0.0000755281,0.00000664238,0.00002377041,0.0002296201,0.6461015,0.04040637,0.3111406,0.001304193,0.0002945654],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02578747,0.00009097969,0.9704144,0.0006043756,0.0001303257,0.0001529909,0.00000147139,0.00258504,0.0002329651],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5816385,0.000007863377,0.4180861,0.00009256414,0.0001006717,0.00002149832,4.25616e-7,0.000006025655,0.00004637353],"genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7578791,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.444629,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.1111722750895888,"score_gpt":0.3551924202138077,"score_spread":0.2440201451242189,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}