MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1275153498

First-order strong progression for local-effect basic action theories

2008· article· en· W1275153498 on OpenAlex
Stavros Vassos, Gerhard Lakemeyer, Hector J. Levesque

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAxiomConstruct (python library)Action (physics)Situation calculusClass (philosophy)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Order (exchange)First orderTheoretical computer scienceAlgebra over a fieldArtificial intelligenceCalculus (dental)MathematicsPure mathematicsProgramming languageApplied mathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a seminal paper Lin and Reiter introduced the notion of progression for basic action theories in the situation calculus. The idea is to replace an initial database by a new set of sentences which reflect the changes due to an action. Unfortunately, progression requires secondorder logic in general. In this paper, we introduce the notion of strong progression, a slight variant of Lin and Reiter that has the intended properties, and we show that in case actions have only local effects, progression is always first-order representable. Moreover, for a restricted class of local-effect axioms we show how to construct a new database that is finite.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.271 · 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