Dysexecutive syndrome model using ACT-R - eScholarship
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dysexecutive syndrome model using ACT-R H´ el` ene Pigot University of Sherbrooke Alexandre Dion University of Sherbrooke Abstract: People with Action Disorder Syndrome (ADS) are prone to executive errors while performing activities. This project proposes to model the four most frequent types of errors: omission, perseveration, anticipation and substitution, modeled with the cognitive architecture ACT-R. The model is based on psychological theories aimed to explain the executive errors. The coffee preparation selected from the Multi Level Action Test (MLAT) is first simulated in ACT-R [1,2]. Two MLAT conditions are simulated with and without distractors. The four executive errors are then introduced to simulate how people with ADS encounter difficulties while performing the activity. The results of the simulation show the same tendency than the literature. Applying the model to another MLAT activity the sandwich preparation has proved the model robustness. [1] Schwartz, M. F., Montgomery, M. W., Buxbaum, L. J., Lee, S. S., Carew, T. G., Coslett, H. B., et al. (1998). Naturalistic action impairment in closed head injury. Neuropsychology, 12(1), 13-28. [2] Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111, 136-1060.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it