MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410291923 · doi:10.1016/j.xinn.2025.100948

Foundation models and intelligent decision-making: Progress, challenges, and perspectives

2025· review· en· W4410291923 on OpenAlexaff
Jincai Huang, Yongjun Xu, Qi Wang, Qi Wang, Xingxing Liang, Fei Wang, Zhao Zhang, Wei Wei, Boxuan Zhang, Libo Huang, Ji Yoon Chang, Lizhi Ma, Ting Ma, Yuxuan Liang, Jie Zhang, Jianwei Guo, Xuhui Jiang, Xinxin Fan, Zhulin An, Tingting Li, Xuefei Li, Zezhi Shao, Tangwen Qian, Tao Sun, Boyu Diao, Chuanguang Yang, Chenqing Yu, Yiqing Wu, Mengxian Li, Haifeng Zhang, Yongcheng Zeng, Zhicheng Zhang, Zhengqiu Zhu, Yiqin Lv, Aming Li, Chen Xu, Bo An, Wei Xiao, Chenguang Bai, Yuxing Mao, Zhigang Yin, Sheng Gui, Wentao Su, Yinghao Zhu, Junyi Gao, Xinyu He, Yizhou Li, Guangyin Jin, Xiang Ao, Haoran Tan, Lijun Yun, Hongquan Shi, Jun Li, Changjun Fan, Kuihua Huang, Ewen M. Harrison, Victor C. M. Leung, Sihang Qiu, Yanjie Dong, Xiaolong Zheng, Gang Wang, Yu Zheng, Yuanzhuo Wang, Jiafeng Guo, Xueqi Cheng, Yaonan Wang, Shanlin Yang, Mengyin Fu, Aiguo Fei

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Innovation · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersYouth Innovation Promotion AssociationNational Postdoctoral Program for Innovative TalentsChongqing Basic Science and Advanced Technology Research ProgramNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaScience and Technology Program of Hunan ProvinceYunnan Key Research and Development ProgramCentre Scientifique et Technique du BâtimentMinistry of Natural Resources of the People's Republic of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityYouth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of SciencesChinese Academy of SciencesPeking Union Medical College HospitalNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)Management scienceEngineering ethicsComputer scienceData scienceEngineeringHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intelligent decision-making (IDM) is a cornerstone of artificial intelligence (AI) designed to automate or augment decision processes. Modern IDM paradigms integrate advanced frameworks to enable intelligent agents to make effective and adaptive choices and decompose complex tasks into manageable steps, such as AI agents and high-level reinforcement learning. Recent advances in multimodal foundation-based approaches unify diverse input modalities-such as vision, language, and sensory data-into a cohesive decision-making process. Foundation models (FMs) have become pivotal in science and industry, transforming decision-making and research capabilities. Their large-scale, multimodal data-processing abilities foster adaptability and interdisciplinary breakthroughs across fields such as healthcare, life sciences, and education. This survey examines IDM's evolution, advanced paradigms with FMs and their transformative impact on decision-making across diverse scientific and industrial domains, highlighting the challenges and opportunities in building efficient, adaptive, and ethical decision systems.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe InnovationSame topicCognitive Science and MappingFrench-language works237,207