Bibliographic record
Abstract
An “active learning system ” will sequentially decide which unlabeled instance to label, with the goal of efficiently gathering the information necessary to produce a good classifier. Some such systems greedily select the next instance based only on properties of that instance and the few currently labeled points — e.g., selecting the one closest to the current classification boundary. Unfortunately, these approaches ignore the valuable information contained in the other unlabeled instances, which can help identify a good classifier much faster. For the previous approaches that do exploit this unlabeled data, this information is mostly used in a conservative way. One common property of the approaches in the literature is that the active learner sticks to one single query selection criterion in the whole process. We propose a system, MM+M, that selects the query instance that is able to provide the maximum conditional mutual information about the labels of the unlabeled instances, given the labeled data, in an optimistic way. This approach implicitly exploits the discriminative partition information contained in the unlabeled data. Instead of using one selection criterion, MM+M also employs a simple on-line method that changes its selection rule when it encounters an “unexpected label”. Our empirical results demonstrate that this new approach works effectively. 1
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".