MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1590016351

Bounded Situation Calculus Action Theories and Decidable Verification.

2012· article· en· W1590016351 on OpenAlexaff
Giuseppe De Giacomo, Yves Lespérance, Fabio Patrizi

Bibliographic record

VenueIRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecidabilityBounded functionSituation calculusAction theory (sociology)Action (physics)Class (philosophy)Domain (mathematical analysis)MathematicsSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceCalculus (dental)Discrete mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematicsEpistemologyArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We define a notion of bounded action theory in the situation calculus, where the theory entails that in all situations, the number of ground fluent atoms is bounded by a constant. Such theories can still have an infinite domain and an infinite set of states. We argue that such theories are fairly common in applications, either because facts do not persist indefinitely or because one eventually forgets some facts, as one learns new ones. We discuss various ways of obtaining bounded action theories. The main result of the paper is that verification of an expressive class of first-order μ-calculus temporal properties in such theories is in fact decidable. Copyright © 2012, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations53
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome)Same topicLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeFrench-language works237,207