MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163438293 · doi:10.1177/0037549703039950

Simulation of Graphical Models for Multiagent Probabilistic Inference

2003· article· en· W2163438293 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangdong An, N. Cercone

Bibliographic record

VenueSIMULATION · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBayesian networkGraphical modelBacktrackingProbabilistic logicInferenceDomain (mathematical analysis)Set (abstract data type)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceInfluence diagramTheoretical computer scienceData miningAlgorithmProgramming languageMathematicsDecision tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiply-sectioned Bayesian networks (MSBNs) extend Bayesian networks to graphical models for multiagent probabilistic reasoning. The empirical study of algorithms for manipulations of MSBNs (e.g., verification, compilation, and inference) requires experimental MSBNs. As engineering MSBNs in large problem domains requires significant knowledge and engineering effort, the authors explore automatic simulation of MSBNs. Due to the large domain over which an MSBN is defined and a set of constraints to be satisfied, a generate-and-test approach toward simulation has a high rate of failure. The authors present an alternative approach that treats the simulation process as a sequence of decisions. They constrain the space of each decision so that backtracking is minimized and the outcome is always a legal MSBN. A suite of algorithms that implements this approach is presented, and experimental results are shown.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
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 science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIMULATIONSame topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207