MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097621701 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2007.913602

A Solution to the Stochastic Point Location Problem in Metalevel Nonstationary Environments

2008· article· en· W2097621701 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOraclePoint (geometry)Computer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Learning automataDiscretizationSpace (punctuation)Point locationInterval (graph theory)AutomatonMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCombinatoricsGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the first known solution to the stochastic point location (SPL) problem when the environment is nonstationary. The SPL problem involves a general learning problem in which the learning mechanism (which could be a robot, a learning automaton, or, in general, an algorithm) attempts to learn a "parameter," for example, lambda*, within a closed interval. However, unlike the earlier reported results, we consider the scenario when the learning is to be done in a nonstationary setting. For each guess, the environment essentially informs the mechanism, possibly erroneously (i.e., with probability p), which way it should move to reach the unknown point. Unlike the results available in the literature, we consider the fascinating case when the point sought for is itself stochastically moving (which is modeled as follows). The environment communicates with an intermediate entity (referred to as the teacher/oracle) about the point itself, i.e., advising where it should go. The mechanism that searches for the point in turn receives responses from the teacher/oracle, which directs how it should move. Therefore, the point itself, in the overall setting, is moving, i.e., delivering possibly incorrect information about its location to the teacher/oracle. This in turn means that the "environment" is itself nonstationary, which implies that the advice of the teacher/oracle is both uncertain and changing with time-rendering the problem extremely fascinating. The heart of the strategy we propose involves discretizing the space and performing a controlled random walk on this space. Apart from deriving some analytic results about our solution, we also report the simulation results that demonstrate the power of the scheme, and state some potential applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.205 · 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