MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392907203 · doi:10.32920/25412866

RLML: A Domain-specific Modelling Language for Reinforcement Learning

2024· preprint· en· W4392907203 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie Sinani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningSyntaxDomain (mathematical analysis)AbstractionArtificial intelligenceDomain-specific languageSimplicityConstraint (computer-aided design)Modeling languageMachine learningProgramming languageSoftware engineeringHuman–computer interactionSoftwareEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, machine learning technologies have gained intense popularity and are being used in a wide range of domains. However, due to the complexity associated with machine learning algorithms, it is a challenge to make it user-friendly, easy to understand and implement. Machine learning applications are especially challenging for users who do not have proficiency in this area. In this work, we use model-driven engineering (MDE) methods and tools for developing a domain-specific modelling language (DSML) to contribute towards providing a solution for this problem. We targeted reinforcement learning domain from machine learning technologies, and evaluated the proposed language with multiple applications. We built a domain-specific modelling environment to support our reinforcement learning modelling language (RLML). The tool supports syntax-directed editing, constraint checking, and automatic generation of code from RLML models. With our proposed approach, we were able to move away from the complexity of implementing machine learning algorithms in general purpose languages and offer abstraction and simplicity for non-experts, which are a few of the characteristics and benefits of modelling languages.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering Research→French-language works237,207→