Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation proposes two novel approaches for extending AgentSpeak with qualitative uncertainty reasoning by integrating two dynamic variants of epistemic logic.These extensions address a crucial gap in the literature where qualitative approaches to uncertainty are seldom integrated into agent-oriented programming languages due to various challenges related to methodology, implementation, and computational complexity.The extensions provide various symbolic constructs that enable the modelling and reasoning of belief uncertainty.The significance of qualitative uncertainty reasoning is illustrated through a simple Minesweeper scenario and two complex uncertainty challenges from the 2019 Multi-Agent Programming Contest: uncertain navigation and agent identification.Given the ability to express qualitative uncertainty, we equip the agent with a more robust and effective way to plan and act under uncertainty.An in-depth evaluation of the performance and scalability of the proposed Agent-Speak extensions is provided, with a heavy focus on examining their impact on the agent's time-sensitive reasoning cycle.The results show that these extensions provide a tractable and computationally feasible approach to extending AgentSpeak with the ability to manage the statics and dynamics of uncertainty.i This dissertation is dedicated to my love, Sandra.A constant source of support and inspiration in every way imaginable, you have always given me the strength and determination to persevere and overcome any challenges that have arisen.I love you and will forever be grateful for the time and experiences we have and will endure together.To Mrs. Morley, I cannot thank you enough for the support you have given to both Sandra and I.Your belief in our potential and your constant push for us to aim higher and strive for greater things will forever impact our lives.It was through the support, encouragement, and inspiration of you and Sandra that I gained the confidence and strength to pursue further education.I love you and will miss you dearly.You will forever be cherished, and your influence will continue to guide Sandra and I as we navigate the next phases of our lives.I would also like to express my gratitude to Professor Esfandiari, whose support, guidance, and encouragement have been invaluable.Your expertise and wisdom have played a crucial role in my academic and personal growth, and I am truly grateful for the opportunity to learn from and work alongside you.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".