MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313299845 · doi:10.1287/moor.2022.1344

Error Analysis of Surrogate Models Constructed Through Operations on Submodels

2022· article· en· W4313299845 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Operations Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack boxChenMathematicsFunction (biology)Mathematical optimizationSurrogate modelComputer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Model-based methods are popular in derivative-free optimization (DFO). In most of them, a single model function is built to approximate the objective function. This is generally based on the assumption that the objective function is one black box. However, some real-life and theoretical problems show that the objective function may consist of several black boxes. In those problems, the information provided by each black box may not be equal. In this situation, one can build multiple submodels that are then combined to become a final model. In this paper, we analyze the relation between the accuracy of those submodels and the model constructed through their operations. We develop a broad framework that can be used as a theoretical tool in model error analysis and future research in DFO algorithm design. Funding: Y. Chen’s research is partially funded by the MITACS Globalink program. All authors research partially supported by NSERC of Canada Discovery [Grant 2018-03865].

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.246 · 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