MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Semi-rational models of conditioning:

2008· book-chapter· en· W1544203215 on OpenAlexaff
Nathaniel D. Daw, Aaron Courville, Peter Dayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian inferenceVariety (cybernetics)InferenceBayesian probabilityComputer scienceProbabilistic logicConditioningOperant conditioningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPsychologyMathematicsSocial psychologyReinforcement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter considers the question of how learning adapts to changing environments, with particular reference to animal studies of operant and classical conditioning. It discusses a variety of probabilistic models, with different assumptions concerning the environment; and contrasts this type of model with a model by Kruschke (2006) which carries out local, approximate, Bayesian inference. It further suggests that it may be too early to incorporate mechanistic limitations into models of conditioning — enriching the understanding of the environment, and working with a ‘pure’ Bayesian rational analysis for that environment, may provide an alternative, and perhaps theoretically more elegant, way forward.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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)0.0050.000

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.120 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations44
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207