MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576239431

Action selection for hammer shots in curling

2016· article· en· W2576239431 on OpenAlexaff
Zaheen Farraz Ahmad, Robert C. Holte, Michael Bowling

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelaunay triangulationCurlingHammerComputer scienceAction (physics)Selection (genetic algorithm)Artificial intelligenceState spaceTriangulationComputer visionMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringGeometryStatisticsStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Curling is an adversarial two-player game with a continuous state and action space, and stochastic transitions. This paper focuses on one aspect of the full game, namely, finding the optimal hammer shot, which is the last action taken before a score is tallied. We survey existing methods for finding an optimal action in a continuous, low-dimensional space with stochastic outcomes, and adapt a method based on Delaunay triangulation to our application. Experiments using our curling physics simulator show that the adapted Delaunay triangulation's shot selection outperforms other algorithms, and with some caveats, exceeds Olympic-level human performance.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207