MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989094794

Active preference learning using trajectory segmentation

2019· dissertation· en· W6989094794 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLand Use and Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsPatienceGratitudeFlexibility (engineering)RobotPreferencePreference learningConstant (computer programming)Active learning (machine learning)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning is currently used heavily to develop robot behaviors, giving great flexibility and power, but there remains significant burden on human designers to specify reward functions or label data for the learning target.Learning from demonstration is a very intuitive way to teach your robot a new skill.This thesis considers two improvements to modern learning from demonstrations.Foremost, I would like to acknowledge and express my sincere gratitude to my thesis advisor, Prof. David Meger for his help, support, expert advice and amiable patience throughout all stages of the work.I would also like to thank him for his constant encouragement that not only made this work possible but also introduced

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.252 · 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