Bibliographic record
Abstract
Markov processes are a ubiquitous modeling tool used to model a variety of probabilistic phenomena across a range of disciplines. In this thesis, we develop algorithms for studying Markov processes using tools from the field of automated reasoning. First, we tackle a variant of sensitivity analysis, where we want to obtain all possible parameters for a Markov process such that the total reward achieves a fixed threshold. The set of such parameters forms a semialgebraic set, and so we use cylindrical algebraic decomposition, an algorithm developed for the existential theory of the reals, to describe this set. By exploiting properties of our polynomial system, we develop a variant that runs in singly exponential time, instead of the doubly exponential complexity in the general case. Next, we study properties of Markov processes where the parameters are functions, given as machine learning models, of exogenous variables. Using ideas from formal verification of machine learning models and probabilistic model checking, we show how to obtain guaranteed bounds on the behavior of such processes. For a wide selection of machine learning models, we show that obtaining such guarantees is equivalent to solving a bilinear program, which are classically NP-hard problems. We develop a special decomposition algorithm that solves the bilinear program orders-of-magnitude faster than state-of-the-art solvers. Our algorithmic developments are implemented in two software packages: markovag, which implements our variant of cylindrical algebraic decomposition; and markovml, which provides a domain-specific language for constructing Markov processes, embedding pretrained machine learning models, and then solving the resulting bilinear program with our decomposition scheme. Lastly, we perform a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis using data from nearly 25,000 real cardiac arrests in Ontario, Canada. Using drones to deliver defibrillators to the site of cardiac arrests has been trialled, but a cost-effectiveness analysis has been lacking. Our detailed analysis shows that drones are a cost-effective solution, and our findings are robust to modeling assumptions. The richness of this analysis makes it a fertile case study for our novel algorithms, and we show how our techniques provide deeper insights than usual cost-effectiveness methods.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".