MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404859366 · doi:10.3390/math12233768

Analyzing Decision-Making in Cognitive Agent Simulations Using Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Models

2024· article· en· W4404859366 on OpenAlexaff
Shengkun Xie, Chong Gan, Anna T. Ławniczak

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralized linear mixed modelMixed modelCognitionComputer scienceCognitive psychologyEconometricsPsychologyMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhancing model interpretability remains an ongoing challenge in predictive modelling, especially when applied to simulation data from complex systems. Investigating the influence and effects of design factors within computer simulations of complex systems requires assessing variable importance through statistical models. These models are crucial for capturing the relationships between factors and response variables. This study focuses on understanding functional patterns and their magnitudes of influence regarding designed factors affecting cognitive agent decision-making in a cellular automaton-based highway crossing simulation. We aim to identify the most influential design factors in the complex system simulation model to better understand the relationship between the decision outcomes and the designed factors. We apply Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Models to explain the significant functional connections between designed factors and response variables, specifically quantifying variable importance. Our analysis demonstrates the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed models and methodologies for analyzing data from complex systems. The findings offer a deeper understanding of the connections between design factors and their resulting responses, facilitating a greater understanding of the underlying dynamics and contributing to the fields of applied mathematics, simulation modelling, and computation.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematicsSame topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207