MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895973392 · doi:10.1109/cig.2018.8490374

Evolving Number Sentence Morphing Puzzles

2018· article· en· W2895973392 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Ashlock, Courtney Kolthof

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentenceComputer scienceMorphingClass (philosophy)Edit distanceArtificial intelligenceWord (group theory)Object (grammar)Natural language processingTheoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Number sentence morphing is an example of a type of edit puzzle. Edit puzzles choose a class of objects and a collection of editing operators. The goal of the puzzle is to change an initial configuration into a final one, using the edit operations, with the intermediate objects remaining within the selected class of of objects. Changing one English word into another by changing single letters, with all the intermediate steps also consisting of English words, is a typical example of an edit game. A number sentence is a well formed mathematical object, which can be used to generate a type of edit puzzle called Number sentence morphing. This puzzle has the player transform a false number sentence into a true one by removing and replacing symbols from a number sentence while leaving the sentence well formed. This type of puzzle is intended for teaching students the notion of well-formation in a game setting as well as providing practice with basic arithmetic. An evolutionary algorithm is used to construct number sentence morphing puzzles while certifying that they can be solved and requiring a minimal number of steps in a solution. The search for number sentences is template driven so particular forms of sentences are searched for in their own sets of runs. An unexpected outcome of this study is that the search landscapes for different templates are very different.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207