MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890521966 · doi:10.1145/3234944.3234976

Levenshtein in Blocks World

2018· article· en· W2890521966 on OpenAlexafffund
Xing Tan, Jimmy Xiangji Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLevenshtein distanceHeuristicsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Encoding (memory)Artificial intelligenceString (physics)String metricAutomated planning and schedulingPlan (archaeology)Domain (mathematical analysis)Similarity (geometry)Matching (statistics)State (computer science)Machine learningString searching algorithmTheoretical computer sciencePattern matchingAlgorithmMathematicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide in this paper an encoding which converts the string matching problems into planning problems in Artificial Intelligence. As an example use of the encoding, Levenshtein distance for measuring similarity between two strings particularly is to be calculated through searching for a feasible plan in shortest length from its initial state to the goal state. The research has its origin in Blocks World, a benchmark domain for studying the theory and application of AI planning. Connecting with AI planning in our belief not only creates promising opportunities in development of new, knowledge-rich heuristics, but also enables hands-on use of existing high-performance AI planners or reasoners, for string matching.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207