MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W131525165

Dual lookups in pattern databases

2005· article· en· W131525165 on OpenAlexaff
Ariel Felner, Uzi Zahavi, Jonathan Schaeffer, Robert C. Holte

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLookup tableProtein Data Bank (RCSB PDB)HeuristicTable (database)Cube (algebra)Extension (predicate logic)Dual (grammatical number)Tree (set theory)DatabaseCombinatoricsProgramming languageMathematicsArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pattern database (PDB) is a heuristic function stored as a lookup table. Symmetries of a state space are often used to enable multiple values to be looked up in a PDB for a given state. This paper introduces an additional PDB lookup, called the dual PDB lookup. A dual PDB lookup is always admissible but can return inconsistent values. The paper also presents an extension of the well-known pathmax method so that inconsistencies in heuristic values are propagated in both directions (child-to-parent, and parent-to-child) in the search tree. Experiments show that the addition of dual lookups and bidirectional pathmax propagation can reduce the number of nodes generated by IDA* by over one order of magnitude in the TopSpin puzzle and Rubik's Cube, and by about a factor of two for the sliding tile puzzles.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations54
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207