MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239903613 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14640060

A Logic For Decidable Reasoning About Actions

2021· preprint· en· W4239903613 on OpenAlexafffund
Yilan Gu, Mikhail Soutchanski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSituation calculusDecidabilityAxiomFragment (logic)Description logicComputer scienceOperator (biology)Projection (relational algebra)Calculus (dental)Natural deductionTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmProgramming languagePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a modified version of the situation calculus built using a two-variable fragment of the first-order logic extended with counting quantifiers. We mention several additional groups of axioms that can be introduced to capture taxonomic reasoning. We show that the regression operator in this framework can be defined similarly to regression in Reiter’s version of the situation calculus. Using this new regression operator, we show that the projection and executability problems (the important reasoning tasks in the situation calculus) are decidable in the modified version even if an initial knowledge base is incomplete. We also discuss the complexity of solving the projection problem in this modified language in general. Furthermore, we define description logic based sub-languages of our modified situation calculus. They are based on the description logics ALCO(U) (or ALCQO(U), respectively). We show that in these sub-languages solving the projection problem has better computational complexity than in the general modified situation calculus. We mention possible applications to formalization of Semantic Web services and some connections with reasoning about actions based on description logics.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207