MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1437335841 · doi:10.1088/1749-4699/8/1/014008

Hyperopt: a Python library for model selection and hyperparameter optimization

2015· article· en· W1437335841 on OpenAlexafffund
James Bergstra, Brent Komer, Chris Eliasmith, Dan Yamins, David Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Science & Discovery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRowland Institute at HarvardOffice of the DirectorNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBayesian optimizationMNIST databaseComputer scienceHyperparameterPython (programming language)Machine learningHyperparameter optimizationArtificial intelligenceModel selectionAlgorithmSupport vector machineDeep learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sequential model-based optimization (also known as Bayesian optimization) is one of the most efficient methods (per function evaluation) of function minimization. This efficiency makes it appropriate for optimizing the hyperparameters of machine learning algorithms that are slow to train. The Hyperopt library provides algorithms and parallelization infrastructure for performing hyperparameter optimization (model selection) in Python. This paper presents an introductory tutorial on the usage of the Hyperopt library, including the description of search spaces, minimization (in serial and parallel), and the analysis of the results collected in the course of minimization. This paper also gives an overview of Hyperopt-Sklearn, a software project that provides automatic algorithm configuration of the Scikit-learn machine learning library. Following Auto-Weka, we take the view that the choice of classifier and even the choice of preprocessing module can be taken together to represent a single large hyperparameter optimization problem . We use Hyperopt to define a search space that encompasses many standard components (e.g. SVM, RF, KNN, PCA, TFIDF) and common patterns of composing them together. We demonstrate, using search algorithms in Hyperopt and standard benchmarking data sets (MNIST, 20-newsgroups, convex shapes), that searching this space is practical and effective. In particular, we improve on best-known scores for the model space for both MNIST and convex shapes. The paper closes with some discussion of ongoing and future work.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.041

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations1,041
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational Science & DiscoverySame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207