MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W131676301 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v24i1.7676

Conformal Mapping by Computationally Efficient Methods

2010· article· en· W131676301 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Pintilie, Ali Ghodsi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformal mapEmbeddingDimensionality reductionData pointInvariant (physics)MathematicsCurse of dimensionalityComputer scienceNonlinear dimensionality reductionAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dimensionality reduction is the process by which a set of data points in a higher dimensional space are mapped to a lower dimension while maintaining certain properties of these points relative to each other. One important property is the preservation of the three angles formed by a triangle consisting of three neighboring points in the high dimensional space. If this property is maintained for those same points in the lower dimensional embedding then the result is a conformal map. However, many of the commonly used nonlinear dimensionality reduction techniques, such as Locally Linear Embedding (LLE) or Laplacian Eigenmaps (LEM), do not produce conformal maps. Post-processing techniques formulated as instances of semi-definite programming (SDP) problems can be applied to the output of either LLE or LEM to produce a conformal map. However, the effectiveness of this approach is limited by the computational complexity of SDP solvers. This paper will propose an alternative post-processing algorithm that produces a conformal map but does not require a solution to a SDP problem and so is more computationally efficient thus allowing it to be applied to a wider selection of datasets. Using this alternative solution, the paper will also propose a new algorithm for 3D object classification. An interesting feature of the 3D classification algorithm is that it is invariant to the scale and the orientation of the surface.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207