MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W136736547

Conformant probabilistic planning via CSPs

2003· article· en· W136736547 on OpenAlex

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceEncoding (memory)Plan (archaeology)Scheme (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationProbabilistic analysis of algorithmsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new algorithm for the conformant probabilistic planning problem. This is a planning problem in which we have probabilistic actions and we want to optimize the probability of achieving the goal, but we have no observations available to us during the course of the plan’s execution. Our algorithm is based on a CSP encoding of the problem, and a new more efficient caching scheme. The result is a gain in performance of several orders of magnitude over previous AI planners that have addressed the same problem. We also compare our algorithm to algorithms for decision theoretic planning. There our algorithm is faster on small problems but does not scale as well. We identify the reasons for this, and show that the two types of algorithms are able to take advantage of distinct types of problem structure. Finding an algorithm that can lever both types of structure simultaneously is posed as an interesting open problem.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207