Ivor Cribben and Anastasiou Andreas’s contribution to the Discussion of ‘the Discussion Meeting on Probabilistic and statistical aspects of machine learning’
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
We extend our congratulations to the authors for their innovative contribution. Here, we address three key points: change-point labelling, handling imbalanced datasets, and computational complexity. Change-point labelling in datasets has many flaws and challenges. The primary flaw is the subjectivity inherent in the task as it often relies on human judgement. This subjectivity introduces biases and inconsistencies. One challenge is the lack of a universally accepted standard for change-point labelling unlike other machine learning classification problems. Hence, it is difficult to compare results across studies, hindering reproducibility and reliability. A further issue is that change-point labelling can be a time-consuming and labour-intensive task, especially for large and complex time series datasets. This process often requires domain expertise and can be impractical for real-time or high-frequency data analysis. Imbalanced class distributions in datasets are another issue. Change-points are often rarer than normal instances, but imbalanced datasets can lead to skewed evaluation results, with methods prioritizing the majority class and failing to effectively detect true change-points or managing an excessive rate of false positives. We wonder whether the authors explored examples of imbalanced data, specifically those involving significant changes in approximately half of the dataset (N/2). It is important to underscore that addressing the labelling and imbalance challenges is pivotal for change-point methods that rely on training neural networks. The sample size used for training neural networks plays a crucial role in determining the model’s performance and generalizability. An excessively large sample size might lead to increased computational costs and training time without significant gains in performance after a certain point. In the first step of the proposed algorithm, there is the necessity of training a neural network using a considerable sample size. A discussion on this topic could convince the reader that the proposed method can be extended to an online framework (as discussed in Section 7). Apart from accuracy, and especially in high-frequency data, online change-point detection methods have to be very computationally efficient in order for users to act promptly. The computational complexity in the simple univariate setting is also crucial to understand extensions to practically meaningful adaptations of the algorithm to multivariate, possibly high-dimensional frameworks. Furthermore, an expansion of the method to the multiple change-point framework is discussed through an idea similar to that of moving sum (MOSUM; Eichinger & Kirch, 2018). It would be beneficial to the reader for the authors to justify this choice; is it due to MOSUM’s low computational complexity?
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 découle