Goal-oriented sensor selection for intelligent phones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context information on a smart phone can be used to tailor applications for specific situations (e.g. provide tailored routing advice based on location, gas prices and traffic). However, typical context-aware smart phone applications use very limited context information such as user identity, location and time. In the future, smart phones will need to decide from a wide range of sensors to gather information from in order to best accommodate user needs and preferences in a given context. In this paper, we present a model for sensor selection within decision-making processes, in which observational features are selected based on longer-term impact on the decisions made by the smart phone. This problem is more challenging than measuring information gain, because information gathering can be useful for decisions made at some point in the future. This paper formulates the problem as a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP), and shows how the POMDP can integrate partially available sensor information with user goals and preferences, allowing a seamless fusion of uncertain sensor data with complex and long-term decision-making on the mobile device.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".