MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2023014747 · doi:10.1145/1143997.1144275

Genetic algorithms for action set selection across domains

2006· article· en· W2023014747 on OpenAlexaff
Greg Lee, Vadim Bulitko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAction selectionSoftware portabilityInterpretation (philosophy)Selection (genetic algorithm)Set (abstract data type)Domain (mathematical analysis)Action (physics)Markov decision processGenetic algorithmImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learningMathematical optimizationMarkov processMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Action set selection in Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) is an area of research that has received little attention. On the other hand, the set of actions available to an MDP agent can have a significant impact on the ability of the agent to gain optimal rewards. Last year at GECCO'05, the first automated action set selection tool powered by genetic algorithms was presented. The demonstration of its capabilities, though intriguing, was limited to a single domain. In this paper, we apply the tool to a more challenging problem of oil sand image interpretation. In the new experiments, genetic algorithms evolved a compact high-performance set of image processing operators, decreasing interpretation time by 98% while improving image interpretation accuracy by 55%. These results exceed the original performance and suggest certain cross-domain portability of the approach.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→