MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964331425

Methods for computing state similarity in Markov decision processes

2006· article· en· W2964331425 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceMetric (unit)HeuristicEquivalence (formal languages)Markov decision processMarkov processTheoretical computer scienceMarkov chainState spaceSimilarity (geometry)Variety (cybernetics)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningDiscrete mathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A popular approach to solving large probabilis-tic systems relies on aggregating states based on a measure of similarity. Many approaches in the literature are heuristic. A number of recent methods rely instead on metrics based on the no-tion of bisimulation, or behavioral equivalence between states (Givan et al., 2003; Ferns et al., 2004). An integral component of such metrics is the Kantorovich metric between probability dis-tributions. However, while this metric enables many satisfying theoretical properties, it is costly to compute in practice. In this paper, we use tech-niques from network optimization and statistical sampling to overcome this problem. We obtain in this manner a variety of distance functions for MDP state aggregation that differ in the trade-off between time and space complexity, as well as the quality of the aggregation. We provide an empirical evaluation of these tradeoffs. 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207