MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2575405755

The complexity of learning acyclic CP-nets

2016· article· en· W2575405755 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

VenueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDimension (graph theory)Concept classTheoretical computer scienceTree (set theory)Computational complexity theoryCore (optical fiber)MistakeUpper and lower boundsVC dimensionArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learningCombinatorics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning of user preferences has become a core issue in AI research. For example, recent studies investigate learning of Conditional Preference Networks (CP-nets) from partial information. To assess the optimality of learning algorithms as well as to better understand the combinatorial structure of CP-net classes, it is helpful to calculate certain learning-theoretic information complexity parameters. This paper provides theoretical justification for exact values (or in some cases bounds) of some of the most central information complexity parameters, namely the VC dimension, the (recursive) teaching dimension, the self-directed learning complexity, and the optimal mistake bound, for classes of acyclic CP-nets. We further provide an algorithm that learns tree-structured CP-nets from membership queries. Using our results on complexity parameters, we can assess the optimality of our algorithm as well as that of another query learning algorithm for acyclic CP-nets presented in the literature.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.194 · 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