Foundation models and intelligent decision-making: Progress, challenges, and perspectives
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it