MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982435807 · doi:10.1142/s0218488511007416

MULTIAGENT EXPEDITION WITH GRAPHICAL MODELS

2011· article· en· W1982435807 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

VenueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityComputer scienceGraphical modelSet (abstract data type)Class (philosophy)ObservableMarkov decision processMulti-agent systemArtificial intelligencePartially observable Markov decision processMarkov chainMathematical optimizationMarkov processMachine learningMarkov modelMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate a class of multiagent planning problems termed multiagent expedition, where agents move around an open, unknown, partially observable, stochastic, and physical environment, in pursuit of multiple and alternative goals of different utility. Optimal planning in multiagent expedition is highly intractable. We introduce the notion of conditional optimality, decompose the task into a set of semi-independent optimization subtasks, and apply a decision-theoretic multiagent graphical model to solve each subtask optimally. A set of techniques are proposed to enhance modeling so that the resultant graphical model can be practically evaluated. Effectiveness of the framework and its scalability are demonstrated through experiments. Multiagent expedition can be characterized as decentralized partially observable Markov decision processes (Dec-POMDPs). Hence, this work contributes towards practical planning in Dec-POMDPs.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.214 · 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