MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W856071238

Nogood processing in csps

2008· dissertation· en· W856071238 on OpenAlex
George Katsirelos

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 · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstraint satisfaction problemComputer scienceSpeedupSolverDomain (mathematical analysis)SatisfiabilityBoolean satisfiability problemConstraint (computer-aided design)Theoretical computer scienceConstraint satisfactionMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceParallel computingMathematicsProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The constraint satisfaction problem is an NP-complete problem that provides a convenient framework for expressing many computationally hard problems. In addition, domain knowledge can be efficiently integrated into CSPs, providing a potentially exponential speedup in some cases. The CSP is closely related to the satisfiability problem and many of the techniques developed for one have been transferred to the other. However, the recent dramatic improvements in SAT solvers that result from learning clauses during search have not been transferred successfully to CSP solvers. In this thesis we propose that this failure is due to a fundamental restriction of \newtext{nogood learning, which is intended to be the analogous to clause learning in CSPs}. This restriction means that nogood learning can exhibit a superpolynomial slowdown compared to clause learning in some cases. We show that the restriction can be lifted, delivering promising results. Integration of nogood learning in a CSP solver, however, presents an additional challenge, as a large body of domain knowledge is typically encoded in the form of domain specific propagation algorithms called global constraints. Global constraints often completely eliminate the advantages of nogood learning. We demonstrate generic methods that partially alleviate the problem irrespective of the type of global constraint. We also show that more efficient methods can be integrated into specific global constraints and demonstrate the feasibility of this approach on several widely used global constraints.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.293 · 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