MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2572958716 · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-672-9-408

Situation Calculus Game Structures and GDL

2022· article· en· W2572958716 on OpenAlex
Giuseppe De Giacomo, Yves Lespérance, Adrian R. Pearce

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

VenueMinerva Access (University of Melbourne) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrectnessSituation calculusComputer scienceAction (physics)Translation (biology)Calculus (dental)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a situation calculus-based account of multiplayers synchronous games in the style of general game playing. Such games can be represented as action theories of a special form, situation calculus synchronous game structures (SCSGSs), in which we have a single action tick whose effects depend on the combination of moves selected by the players. Then one can express properties of the game, e.g., winning conditions, playability, weak and strong winnability, etc. in a first-order alternating-time μ-calculus. We discuss verification in this framework considering computational effectiveness. We also show that SCSGSs can be considered as a firstorder variant of the Game Description Language (GDL) that supports infinite domains and possibly non-terminating games. We do so by giving a translation of GDL specifications into SCSGSs and showing its correctness. Finally, we show how a player's possible moves can be specified in a Golog-like programming language.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.206 · 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