MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029586423 · doi:10.1145/2000378.2000399

Symbolic model checking of probabilistic knowledge

2011· article· en· W2029586423 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xiaowei Huang, Cheng Luo, Ron van der Meyden

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceProbabilistic logicModel checkingProgramming languageTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an algorithm for model checking a fragment of the logic of knowledge and probability in multi-agent systems, with respect to a perfect recall interpretation of knowledge and agents' subjective probability. The algorithm has been implemented in the epistemic model checker MCK. Some experiments with the implemented algorithm are reported, in which some properties of agents' probabilistic knowledge are verified in two security protocols: Chaum's Dining Cryptographers protocol, and a protocol for Oblivious Transfer due to Rivest.

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)0.019
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207