MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104553574 · doi:10.1109/tip.2006.873472

Pattern generation using likelihood inference for cellular automata

2006· article· en· W2104553574 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 Image Processing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCellular Automata and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCellular automatonContinuous spatial automatonStochastic cellular automatonInferenceAlgorithmBinary numberAutomatonComputer scienceMathematicsTheoretical computer scienceQuantum finite automataAutomata theoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cellular automata are discrete dynamical systems which evolve on a discrete grid. Recent studies have shown that cellular automata with relatively simple rules can produce highly complex patterns. We develop likelihood-based methods for estimating rules of cellular automata aimed at the re-generation of observed regular patterns. Under noisy data, our approach is equivalent to estimating the local map of a stochastic cellular automaton. Direct computations of the maximum likelihood estimates are possible for regular binary patterns. The likelihood formulation of the problem is congenial with the use of the minimum description length principle as a model selection tool. We illustrate our method with a series of examples using binary images.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.250 · 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