MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962737861

Multi-context models for reasoning under partial knowledge: generative process and inference grammar

2015· article· en· W2962737861 on OpenAlexaff
Ardavan Salehi Nobandegani, Ioannis Psaromiligkos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGraphical modelProbabilistic logicInferenceDomain (mathematical analysis)Theoretical computer scienceDomain knowledgeArtificial intelligenceContext (archaeology)Variable eliminationBayesian networkMachine learningNatural language processingMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arriving at the complete probabilistic knowledge of a domain, i.e., learning how all variables inter-act, is indeed a demanding task. In reality, set-tings often arise for which an individual merely possesses partial knowledge of the domain, and yet, is expected to give adequate answers to a variety of posed queries. That is, although pre-cise answers to some queries, in principle, cannot be achieved, a range of plausible answers is at-tainable for each query given the available partial knowledge. In this paper, we propose the Multi-Context Model (MCM), a new graphical model to represent the state of partial knowledge as to a domain. MCM is a middle ground between Prob-abilistic Logic, Bayesian Logic, and Probabilistic Graphical Models. For this model we discuss: (i) the dynamics of constructing a contradiction-free MCM, i.e., to form partial beliefs regarding a do-main in a gradual and probabilistically consistent way, and (ii) how to perform inference, i.e., to evaluate a probability of interest involving some variables of the domain. 1

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207