MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144283734 · doi:10.1609/socs.v2i1.18207

Probably Approximately Correct Heuristic Search

2021· article· en· W2144283734 on OpenAlexaff
Roni Stern, Ariel Felner, Robert C. Holte

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial Search · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersIsrael Science Foundation
KeywordsGeneralizationHeuristicBeam searchIncremental heuristic searchTask (project management)Bidirectional searchSearch algorithmComputer scienceBest-first searchQuality (philosophy)AlgorithmSequence (biology)Beam stack searchMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A* is a best-first search algorithm that returns an optimal solution. w-admissible algorithms guarantee that the returned solution is no larger than w times the optimal solution. In this paper we introduce a generalization of the w-admissibility concept that we call PAC search, which is inspired by the PAC learning framework in Machine Learning. The task of a PAC search algorithm is to find a solution that is w-admissible with high probability. In this paper we formally define PAC search, and present a framework for PAC search algorithms that can work on top of any search algorithm that produces a sequence of solutions. Experimental results on the 15-puzzle demonstrate that our framework activated on top of Anytime Weighted A* (AWA*) expands significantly less nodes than regular AWA* while returning solutions that have almost the same quality.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial SearchSame topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207