MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153601367

A Novel Prioritization Technique for Solving Markov Decision Processes

2008· article· en· W2153601367 on OpenAlexaff
Jilles Dibangoye, Brahim Chaib-draa, Abdel‐Illah Mouaddib

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackupComputer scienceMarkov decision processPrioritizationOverhead (engineering)Metric (unit)Markov processMathematical optimizationSequence (biology)Function (biology)Markov chainComputationDistributed computingAlgorithmMachine learningMathematicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the problem of computing an optimal value func-tion for Markov decision processes. Since finding this func-tion quickly and accurately requires substantial computa-tion effort, techniques that accelerate fundamental algorithms have been a main focus of research. Among them prioriti-zation solvers suggest solutions to the problem of ordering backup operations. Prioritization techniques for ordering the sequence of backup operations reduce the number of needed backups considerably, but involve significant overhead. This paper provides a new way to order backups, based on a map-ping of states space into a metric space. Empirical evaluation verifies that our method achieves the best balance between the number of backups executed and the effort required to prior-itized backups, showing order of magnitude improvement in runtime over number of benchmarks.

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)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207