MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3018946989 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.12850

Learning Neural-Symbolic Descriptive Planning Models via Cube-Space Priors: The Voyage Home (to STRIPS)

2020· preprint· en· W3018946989 on OpenAlexaff
Masataro Asai, Christian Muise

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHeuristicsArtificial intelligenceDomain (mathematical analysis)Representation (politics)Cube (algebra)HeuristicReinforcement learningTheoretical computer sciencePruningMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We achieved a new milestone in the difficult task of enabling agents to learn about their environment autonomously. Our neuro-symbolic architecture is trained end-to-end to produce a succinct and effective discrete state transition model from images alone. Our target representation (the Planning Domain Definition Language) is already in a form that off-the-shelf solvers can consume, and opens the door to the rich array of modern heuristic search capabilities. We demonstrate how the sophisticated innate prior we place on the learning process significantly reduces the complexity of the learned representation, and reveals a connection to the graph-theoretic notion of "cube-like graphs", thus opening the door to a deeper understanding of the ideal properties for learned symbolic representations. We show that the powerful domain-independent heuristics allow our system to solve visual 15-Puzzle instances which are beyond the reach of blind search, without resorting to the Reinforcement Learning approach that requires a huge amount of training on the domain-dependent reward information.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207