MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1568487591 · doi:10.1109/iat.2004.94

Revising Markov boundary for multiagent probabilistic inference

2004· article· en· W1568487591 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

VenueIEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphical modelVariable eliminationBayesian networkObservableProbabilistic logicComputer scienceMarkov chainMarkov modelVariable-order Bayesian networkBoundary (topology)InferenceLatent variableMarkov processVariable-order Markov modelVariable (mathematics)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceBayesian inferenceMathematicsBayesian probabilityMachine learningStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiply sectioned Bayesian networks (MSBNs) extend Bayesian networks (BNs) to graphical models that provide a coherent framework for probabilistic inference in cooperative multiagent distributed interpretation systems. Observation plays an important role in the inference with graphical models. Since observation of each observable variable has a cost, it would be helpful if we can find the most relevant variables to observe. In a probabilistic model, a Markov boundary of a variable provides a minimal set of variables that shields the variable from the influence of all other variables. However, the concept cannot be used directly for observation. First, it is generally intractable to verify conditional independencies in a probabilistic model. Second, the Markov boundary members may not be observable. Third, it is defined only for a single variable. Finally, it is not unique. By revising the concept to address these issues, we introduce the concept of observable Markov boundary of a set of nodes defined on d-separation of graphical models. The observable Markov boundary captures all relevant variables to observe for probabilistic inference with graphical models. In an MSBN, the observable Markov boundary of a set of nodes may span across all Bayesian subnets. We present an algorithm for cooperative computation of the observable Markov boundary of a set of nodes in an MSBN without revealing subnet structures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.267 · 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