MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063887261 · doi:10.1142/s0218488515500075

Multiagent Decision Making in Collaborative Decision Networks by Utility Cluster Based Partial Evaluation

2015· article· en· W2063887261 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSubnetComputer scienceSuiteCluster analysisComputationOptimal decisionTransformation (genetics)Focus (optics)Artificial intelligenceData miningMachine learningDistributed computingDecision treeAlgorithmComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider optimal multiagent cooperative decision making in stochastic environments. The focus is on simultaneous decision making, during which agents cooperate by limited communication. We model the multiagent system as a collaborative decision network (CDN). Several techniques are developed to improve efficiency for decision making with CDNs. We present an equivalent transformation of CDN subnets to facilitate model manipulation. We propose partial evaluation to allow action profiles evaluated with reduced computation. We decompose a CDN subnet, based on clustering of utility variables. A general simultaneous decision making algorithm suite is developed that embeds these techniques. We show that the new algorithm suite improves efficiency by a combination of a linear factor and an exponential factor.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.300 · 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