MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916344177 · doi:10.1007/s11590-019-01412-1

The multi-stage dynamic stochastic decision process with unknown distribution of the random utilities

2019· article· en· W2916344177 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

VenueOptimization Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsTransport Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimal decisionMathematical optimizationMultinomial logistic regressionExpected utility hypothesisDecision ruleExpected valueProbability distributionMathematicsStochastic processMultinomial distributionDecision theoryComputer scienceEconometricsStatisticsDecision treeArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a decision maker who performs a stochastic decision process over a multiple number of stages, where the choice alternatives are characterized by random utilities with unknown probability distribution. The decisions are nested each other, i.e. the decision taken at each stage is affected by the subsequent stage decisions. The problem consists in maximizing the total expected utility of the overall multi-stage stochastic dynamic decision process. By means of some results of the extreme values theory, the probability distribution of the total maximum utility is derived and its expected value is found. This value is proportional to the logarithm of the accessibility of the decision maker to the overall set of alternatives in the different stages at the start of the decision process. It is also shown that the choice probability to select alternatives becomes a Nested Multinomial Logit model.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.311 · 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