MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187263253

Using Coarse State Space Abstractions to Detect Mutex Pairs

2013· article· en· W2187263253 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemaphoreBenchmark (surveying)State (computer science)Computer scienceMathematicsState spaceAbstractionSpace (punctuation)AlgorithmProgramming languageOperating systemStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mutex pair in a state space is a pair of assignments of values to state variables that does not occur in any reachable state. Detecting mutex pairs is a problem that has been addressed frequently in the planning literature. In this paper, we present the Coarse Abstraction (CA) method, a new efficient method for detecting mutex pairs in state spaces represented with multi-valued variables. CA detects mutex pairs based on exhaustive search in a collection of very small abstract state spaces. While in general CA may miss some mutex pairs, we provide a formal guarantee that CA finds all mutex pairs under a simple and quite natural condition. Using this formal guarantee, we prove that these properties hold for a range of common benchmark domains. We also show that CA can find all mutex pairs even if the formal guarantee is not satisfied. Finally, we show that CA’s effectiveness depends on how the domain is represented, and that it can fail to find mutex pairs in some domains and representations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207