MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117723247

An on-line decision-theoretic Golog interpreter

2001· article· en· W2117723247 on OpenAlexaff
Mikhail Soutchanski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpreterComputer sciencePrologProgramming languageRepresentation (politics)Artificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider an on-line decision-theoretic interpreter and incremental execution of Golog programs. We introduce two new search control operators and demonstrate in an example how one of them can be used to save computational efforts. In addition to sensing actions designed to identify outcomes of stochastic actions, we consider a new representation for sensing actions that may return both binary and real valued data at the run time. Programmers may use sensing actions explicitly in Golog programs whenever results of sensing are required to evaluate tests. The representation for sensing actions that we introduce allows the use of regression, a computationally efficient mechanism for evaluation of tests. We describe an implementation of the on-line incremental decision-theoretic Golog interpreter in Prolog. The implementation was tested on the B21 robot Golem manufactured by RWI. 1 Introduction This report provides an overview of our recent research devoted to designing c...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.299
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207