MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115867043 · doi:10.1111/0824-7935.00116

Temporal Reasoning and Bayesian Networks

2000· article· en· W2115867043 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

VenueComputational Intelligence · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)Bayesian networkEvent (particle physics)Probabilistic logicContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceTemporal logicMachine learningTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work examines important issues in probabilistic temporal representation and reasoning using Bayesian networks (also known as belief networks). The representation proposed here utilizes temporal (or dynamic) probabilities to represent facts, events, and the effects of events. The architecture of a belief network may change with time to indicate a different causal context. Probability variations with time capture temporal properties such as persistence and causation. They also capture event interaction, and when the interaction between events follows known models such as the competing risks model, the additive model, or the dominating event model, the net effect of many interacting events on the temporal probabilities can be calculated efficiently. This representation of reasoning also exploits the notion of temporal degeneration of relevance due to information obsolescence to improve the efficiency.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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