Exact Learning of Qualitative Constraint Networks from Membership Queries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Qualitative Constraint Network (QCN) is a constraint graph representing problems under qualitative temporal or spatial relations. More formally, a QCN includes a set of entities and a list of qualitative constraints defining the possible scenarios between these entities. Qualitative constraints are expressed as disjunctions of binary relations capturing the (incomplete) knowledge between the involved entities. QCNs effectively represent various real-world applications, including scheduling and planning, configuration, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS). It is, however, challenging to elicit, from the user, the QCN representing a given problem. To overcome this difficulty in practice, we propose a new algorithm for learning, through membership queries, a QCN from a non-expert. Membership queries are asked to elicit temporal or spatial relationships between pairs of temporal or spatial entities. To improve the time performance of our learning algorithm, constraint propagation and ordering heuristics are enforced. The goal is to reduce the number of membership queries needed to reach the target QCN. We conducted several experiments on randomly generated temporal and spatial QCN instances to assess the practical effect of constraint propagation and ordering heuristics. The results of the experiments are encouraging and promising.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it