Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiply sectioned Bayesian networks (MSBNs) support multi‐agent probabilistic inference in distributed large problem domains, where agents (subdomains) are organized by a tree structure (called hypertree). In earlier work, all belief updating methods on a hypertree are made of two rounds of propagation, each of which is implemented as a recursive process. Both processes need to be started from the same designated (root) hypernode. Agents perform local belief updating at most in a partial parallel manner. Such methods may not be suitable for practical multi‐agent environments because they are easy to crush for the problems happened in communication or local belief updating. In this paper, we present a fault‐tolerant belief updating method for multi‐agent probabilistic inference. In this method, multiple agents concurrently perform exact belief updating in a complete parallel. Temporary problems happened from time to time at some agents or some communication channels would not prevent agents from eventually converging to the correct beliefs. Permanently disconnected communication channels would not keep the properly connected portions of the system from appropriately finishing their belief updating within portions. Compared to the previous traversal‐based belief updating, the proposed approach is not only fault‐tolerant but also robust and scalable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".