MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973918868 · doi:10.4204/eptcs.306.20

Mutex Graphs and Multicliques: Reducing Grounding Size for Planning

2019· article· en· W2973918868 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

VenueElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemaphoreMutual exclusionBottleneckGraphRepresentation (politics)Operator (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an approach to representing large sets of mutual exclusions, also known as mutexes or mutex constraints. These are the types of constraints that specify the exclusion of some properties, events, processes, and so on. They are ubiquitous in many areas of applications. The size of these constraints for a given problem can be overwhelming enough to present a bottleneck for the solving efficiency of the underlying solver. In this paper, we propose a novel graph-theoretic technique based on multicliques for a compact representation of mutex constraints and apply it to domain-independent planning in ASP. As computing a minimum multiclique covering from a mutex graph is NP-hard, we propose an efficient approximation algorithm for multiclique covering and show experimentally that it generates substantially smaller grounding size for mutex constraints in ASP than the previously known work in SAT.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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