Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This volume contains the papers accepted to the 24th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2007), which was held at Oregon State University in Corvalis, Oregon, from June 20th to 24th, 2007. ICML is the annual conference of the International Machine Learning Society (IMLS), and provides a venue for the presentation and discussion of current research in the field of machine learning. These proceedings can also be found online at: http://www.machinelearning.org. This year there were 522 submissions to ICML. There was a very thorough review process, in which each paper was reviewed by three program committee (PC) members. Authors were able to respond to the initial reviews, and the PC members could then modify their reviews based on online discussions and the content of this author response. For the first time this year there were two discussion periods led by the senior program committee (SPC), one just before and one after the submission of author responses. At the end of the second discussion period, the SPC members gave their recommendations and provided a summary review for each of their papers. Also for the first time, authors were asked to submit a list of changes with their final accepted papers, which was checked by the SPCs to ensure that reviewer comments had been addressed. Apart from the length restrictions on papers and the compressed time frame, the review process for ICML resembles that of many journal publications. In total, 150 papers were accepted to ICML this year, including a very small number of papers which were initially conditionally accepted, yielding an overall acceptance rate of 29%. ICML attracts submissions from machine learning researchers around the globe. The 150 accepted papers this year were geographically distributed as follows: 66 papers had a first author from the US, 32 from Europe, 19 from China or Hong Kong, 11 from Canada, 6 from India, 5 each from Australia and Japan, 3 from Israel, and 1 each from Korea, Russia and Taiwan. In addition to the main program of accepted papers, which includes both a talk and poster presentation for each paper, the ICML program included 3 workshops and 8 tutorials on machine learning topics which are currently of broad interest. We were also extremely pleased to have David Heckerman (Microsoft Research), Joshua Tenenbaum (Massachussetts Institute of Technology), and Bernhard Scholkopf (Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics) as the invited speakers this year. Thanks to sponsorship by the Machine Learning Journal, we were able to award a number of outstanding student paper prizes. We were fortunate this year that ICML was co-located with the International Conference on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP 2007). ICML and ILP held joint sessions on the first day of ICML 2007.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,100 | 0,061 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».