MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182564612

An Approach for Constructing Reliable Social Agent Based Systems Considering Dynamic Environment and Other Factors Affecting Their Progress.

2014· article· en· W2182564612 on OpenAlexaff
Inderjeet Singh Dogra, Ziad Kobti

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Florida AI Research Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMetric (unit)Outcome (game theory)Decision treeTree (set theory)Machine learningMulti-agent systemArtificial intelligenceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction of agent based model systems is often difficult considering the dynamic and complex nature of real world problems and various implicit factors affecting their behavior. This presents a problem in building accurate and valid systems for use as decision support tools. In this paper, we present an approach for handling some of these factors, specifically acceptance rate, retention rate and social influence, and enable simulated social agent models to evolve in a dynamic environment.The objective is to achieve a more reliable behavior and outcome for the agents in the simulation, despite unpredictable environmental changes. The agents’ knowledge, in terms of their observed responses to the environment and corresponding outcomes, is captured in a semantic tree. A metric is used to detect changes in the environment and the threshold of response of the agent, thereby triggering the agent to adapt its decision tree to maintain a reasonable response beyond its historical knowledge. The results reveal the ability of agents to detect changes in the environment more quickly and with better accuracy, using a case study, and as a result learn to adapt by modifying their decision tree under the influence of considered factors.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Florida AI Research SocietySame topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207