MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346425231 · doi:10.1108/bij-01-2014-0008

An optimal sequential information acquisition model subject to a heuristic assimilation constraint

2016· article· en· W2346425231 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

VenueBenchmarking An International Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatisficingHeuristicComputer scienceConstraint (computer-aided design)Set (abstract data type)Mathematical optimizationDynamic programmingArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to study the optimal sequential information acquisition process of a rational decision maker (DM) when allowed to acquire n pieces of information from a set of bi-dimensional products whose characteristics vary in a continuum set. Design/methodology/approach – The authors incorporate a heuristic mechanism that makes the n-observation scenario faced by a DM tractable. This heuristic allows the DM to assimilate substantial amounts of information and define an acquisition strategy within a coherent analytical framework. Numerical simulations are introduced to illustrate the main results obtained. Findings – The information acquisition behavior modeled in this paper corresponds to that of a perfectly rational DM, i.e. endowed with complete and transitive preferences, whose objective is to choose optimally among the products available subject to a heuristic assimilation constraint. The current paper opens the way for additional research on heuristic information acquisition and choice processes when considered from a satisficing perspective that accounts for cognitive limits in the information processing capacities of DMs. Originality/value – The proposed information acquisition algorithm does not allow for the use of standard dynamic programming techniques. That is, after each observation is gathered, a rational DM must modify his information acquisition strategy and recalculate his or her expected payoffs in terms of the observations already acquired and the information still to be gathered.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.248 · 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