MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066302983 · doi:10.1109/cig.2007.368093

Using Stochastic AI Techniques to Achieve Unbounded Resolution in Finite Player Goore Games and its Applications

2007· article· en· W2066302983 on OpenAlexaff
B. John Oommen, Ole‐Christoffer Granmo, Asle Pedersen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePruningAutomatonDomain (mathematical analysis)Learning automataImplementationTheoretical computer scienceResolution (logic)Field (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Goore Game (GG) introduced by M. L. Tsetlin in 1973 has the fascinating property that it can be resolved in a completely distributed manner with no intercommunication between the players. The game has recently found applications in many domains, including the field of sensor networks and quality-of-service (QoS) routing. In actual implementations of the solution, the players are typically replaced by learning automata (LA). The problem with the existing reported approaches is that the accuracy of the solution achieved is intricately related to the number of players participating in the game -which, in turn, determines the resolution. In other words, an arbitrary accuracy can be obtained only if the game has an infinite number of players. In this paper, we show how we can attain an unbounded accuracy for the GG by utilizing no more than three stochastic learning machines, and by recursively pruning the solution space to guarantee that the retained domain contains the solution to the game with a probability as close to unity as desired. The paper also conjectures on how the solution can be applied to some of the application domains

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207