MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205866692 · doi:10.1145/3487918

Behavioural Plasticity Can Help Evolving Agents in Dynamic Environments but at the Cost of Volatility

2020· article· en· W4205866692 on OpenAlexaff
Chloe M. Barnes, Anikó Ekárt, Kai Olav Ellefsen, Kyrre Glette, Peter R. Lewis, Jim Tørresen

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNorges ForskningsrådUniversitetet i OsloAston University
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Task (project management)NeuromodulationArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionNeurosciencePsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural networks have been widely used in agent learning architectures; however, learnings for one task might nullify learnings for another. Behavioural plasticity enables humans and animals alike to respond to environmental changes without degrading learned knowledge; this can be achieved by regulating behaviour with neuromodulation—a biological process found in the brain. We demonstrate that by modulating activity-propagating signals, neurally trained agents evolving to solve tasks in dynamic environments that are prone to change can expect a significantly higher fitness than non-modulatory agents and also achieve their goals more often. Further, we show that while behavioural plasticity can help agents to achieve goals in these variable environments, this ability to overcome environmental changes with greater success comes at the cost of highly volatile evolution.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive SystemsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207