MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132919007

Generalization in Planning

2022· dissertation· W7132919007 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationLeverage (statistics)Automated planning and schedulingAction (physics)AutomationState (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to generalize from past experiences in order to address new situations is one of the cornerstones of human intelligence. As such, the design of artificial intelligence systems must---at some point---consider the issues involved in generalization. In automated planning, where the objectives are to design systems that are capable of finding courses of action to achieve specific goals given a formal description of their environment, we can say that a system exhibits generalization capabilities if it can leverage its previous solution-finding efforts when addressing new problems. The pervasive use of automation in modern industries signifies that this type of generalization---generalization in planning---is a fundamental requirement for the integration of artificial intelligence techniques into real-world applications. This dissertation aims to provide a generic high-level approach that can be used when confronted with sequential decision-making problems where generalization is important. Overall, the approach works by reformulating the problems into abstract representations, finding solutions for these abstract problems, and attempting to directly use the resulting abstract solutions in the concrete problems. This satisfies the generalization requirements when multiple concrete problems can be represented in one single abstract problem, or when the insights gathered when solving one abstract problem can be transferred towards solving related problems. We instantiate this approach in three different classes of planning problems. First, we address planning problems that have propositional and numeric state variables, including problems with nonlinear numeric constraints. We then address a type of generalized planning where a family of multiple planning problems is described through the use of first-order logic quantification, obtaining a single policy that can be applied on any of the problems. Finally, we show how we can solve reinforcement learning problems where multiple different tasks must be solved in a single environment. As with all reinforcement learning problems, the exact domain dynamics are initially unknown, and solutions must be obtained by repeatedly interacting with the environment. We prove the soundness of all our approaches and present empirical results that demonstrate their efficacy across various different domains. In many cases, we see orders of magnitude improvements in overall time efficiency.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.324 · 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