MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416780431 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.21621

Two behavioural pseudometrics for continuous-time Markov processes

2025· preprint· W4416780431 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Linan Chen, Florence Clerc, Prakash Panangaden

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsMarkov chainMarkov processEquivalence (formal languages)Metric (unit)BisimulationMarkov renewal processMarkov model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bisimulation is a concept that captures behavioural equivalence of states in a variety of types of transition systems. It has been widely studied in discrete-time settings where a key notion is the bisimulation metric which quantifies "how similar two states are". In [ 11], we generalized the concept of bisimulation metric in order to metrize the behaviour of continuous-time Markov processes. Similarly to the discrete-time case, we constructed a pseudometric following two iterative approaches - through a functional and through a real-valued logic, and showed that the outcomes coincide: the pseudometric obtained from the logic is a specific fixpoint of the functional which yields our first pseudometric. However, different from the discrete-time setting, in which the process has a step-by-step dynamics, the behavioural pseudometric we constructed applies to Markov processes that evolve continuously through time, such as diffusions and jump diffusions. While our treatment of the pseudometric in [11] relied on the time-indexed Markov kernels, in [ 8 , 9, 10 ], we showed the importance of trajectories in the consideration of behavioural equivalences for true continuous-time Markov processes. In this paper, we take the work from [11 ] further and propose a second behavioural pseudometric for diffusions based on trajectories. We conduct a similar study of this pseudometric from both the perspective of a functional and the viewpoint of a real-valued logic. We also compare this pseudometric with the first pseudometric obtained in [11].

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207