MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586650997

Reactive Agents Learn to Add Epistemic Structures to the World

2004· article· en· W2586650997 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

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersMax-Planck-Institut für BildungsforschungStrong
KeywordsTask (project management)CognitionComputer scienceAction (physics)Function (biology)Term (time)Artificial intelligenceCognitive sciencePsychologyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide a computationally tractable model of how organisms can learn to add structures to the world to reduce cognitive complexity. This model is then implemented using two techniques: first using a genetic algorithm, and then using the Q-learning algorithm. The results clearly show that organisms with only reactive behavior can learn to systematically add structures to the world to reduce their cognitive load. We show that such learning can happen in both evolutionary time and within an agent’s lifetime. An extension of this model (currently being implemented) is then illustrated, where organisms with just reactive behavior learn to systematically generate and use internal structures akin to representations. Many organisms generate stable structures in the world to reduce cognitive complexity (minimize search or inference), for themselves, for others, or both. Wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus) distribute small objects, such as leaves or twigs, as points of reference while foraging. They do this even under laboratory conditions, using plastic discs. Such ‘waymarking’ diminishes the likelihood of losing interesting locations during foraging (Stopka & MacDonald, 2003). Red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) use urine to mark food caches they have emptied. This marking acts as a memory aid and helps them avoid unnecessary search (Henry, 1977, reported in Stopka & MacDonald, 2003). The male bower bird builds colorful bowers (nest-like structures), which are used by females to make mating decisions (Zahavi & Zahavi, 1997). Ants drop pheromones to trace a path to a food source. Many mammals mark up their territories. At the most basic level, cells in the immune system use antibodies that bind to attacking microbes, thereby ‘marking ’ them. Macrophages use this ‘marking ’ to identify and destroy invading microbes. Bacterial colonies use a strategy called ‘quorum sensing ’ to know that they have reached critical mass (to attack, to emit light, etc.). This strategy involves individual bacteria secreting molecules known as auto-inducers into the environment. The autoinducers accumulate in the environment, and when it reaches a threshold, the colony moves into action

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 categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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