MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195311503 · doi:10.1002/hbe2.275

Psychological model of representation, generation, and adjustion of belief for artificial general intelligence

2021· article· en· W3195311503 on OpenAlexaff
Zhizhong Kai, Xiaolan Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Behavior and Emerging Technologies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Belief revisionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSentenceKnowledge representation and reasoningBelief structureArtificial general intelligenceKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order for strong artificial intelligence to generate human-like belief, there must be an operational definition and a representation consistent with computer simulation. This article reviewed the research findings and theories on representation, generation, and adjustion of belief, and proposed a new three-dimensional network psychological model of belief representation. Belief is represented in two forms, belief sentence and belief structure diagram, and consists of four key elements, which are belief content, belief value, grammar, and link. Based on this belief representation, this article expounded how belief generates and changes, and a possible abstract model for simulation by artificial general intelligence.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Behavior and Emerging TechnologiesSame topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207