Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern state-of-the-art planners operate by generating a grounded transition system prior to performing search for a solution to a given planning task. Some tasks involve a significant number of objects or entail managing predicates and action schemas with a significant number of arguments. Hence, this instantiation procedure can exhaust all available memory and therefore prevent a planner from performing search to find a solution. This thesis explores this limitation by presenting a benchmark set of problems based on Organic Chemistry Synthesis that was submitted to the latest International Planning Competition (IPC-2018). This benchmark was constructed to gauge the performance of the competing planners given that instantiation is an issue. Furthermore, a novel algorithm, the Regression-Based Heuristic Planner (RBHP), is developed with the aim of averting this issue. RBHP was inspired by the retro-synthetic approach commonly used to solve organic synthesis problems efficiently. RBHP solves planning tasks by applying domain independent heuristics, computed by regression, and performing best-first search. In contrast to most modern planners, RBHP computes heuristics backwards by applying the goal-directed regression operator. However, the best-first search proceeds forward similar to other planners. The proposed planner is evaluated on a set of planning tasks included in previous International Planning Competitions (IPC) against a subset of the top scoring state-of-the-art planners submitted to the IPC-2018.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".