MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395906882 · doi:10.1609/socs.v3i1.18234

Multimapping Abstractions and Hierarchical Heuristic Search

2021· article· en· W2395906882 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

VenueProceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial Search · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAbstractionDomain (mathematical analysis)Benchmark (surveying)HeuristicSet (abstract data type)Abstract interpretationState (computer science)Theoretical computer scienceState spaceFunction (biology)Space (punctuation)Key (lock)Programming languageArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we introduce a broadly applicable method, called multimapping abstraction, that allows multiple heuristic values for a state to be extracted from one abstract state space. The key idea is to define an abstraction to be a multimapping, i.e., a function that maps a state in the original state space to a set of states in the abstract space. We performed a large-scale experiment on several benchmark state spaces to compare the memory requirements and runtime of Hierarchical IDA* (HIDA*) using multimapping domain abstractions to HIDA* with individual domain abstractions and to HIDA* with multiple, independent domain abstractions. Our results show that multimapping domain abstractions are superior to both alternatives in terms of both memory usage and runtime.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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