MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1896391230 · doi:10.1109/cca.2015.7320696

Small data-set EKF-based parameter estimation for a behavior-modification model

2015· article· en· W1896391230 on OpenAlexaff
Nikesh Parsotam, D.E. Davison

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtended Kalman filterObservabilityEstimatorComputer scienceKalman filterSet (abstract data type)Monte Carlo methodEstimation theoryCognitive dissonanceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsStatisticsApplied mathematicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work we investigate the use of Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) methods to identify parameters in a nonlinear model. The model, derived in earlier work, describes how a person behaves when he or she is offered a sequence of rewards to carry out a task for which his or her initial attitude is negative. A main conclusion of the paper is that EKF methods can be used to effectively estimate a single parameter, but due to observability problems, estimation of multiple parameters is ineffective. Monte Carlo simulations are used to thoroughly study the performance of the EKF-based estimator to estimate a parameter (related to cognitive dissonance that is experienced by the person making the decision) in cases where only 5, 10, or 20 data samples are available. In addition, preliminary experimental results, based on experiments with 10 data samples, support the validity of the underlying model and demonstrate feasibility of the EKF approach for estimation of the cognitive-dissonance parameter, despite the small size of the data set.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.536
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.144 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive Science and MappingFrench-language works237,207