MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574815653 · doi:10.5555/1497096.1497101

Learning from Skewed Class Multi-relational Databases

2009· article· en· W1574815653 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamenta Informaticae · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelation (database)Computer scienceClass (philosophy)Relational databaseTupleData miningBenchmarkingFeature (linguistics)DatabaseMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relational databases, with vast amounts of data¨Cfrom financial transactions, marketing surveys, medical records, to health informatics observations¨C and complex schemas, are ubiquitous in our society. Multirelational classification algorithms have been proposed to learn from such relational repositories, where multiple interconnected tables (relations) are involved. These methods search for relevant features both from a target relation (in which each tuple is associated with a class label) and relations related to the target, in order to better classify target relation tuples. However, in many practical database applications, such as credit card fraud detection and disease diagnosis, the target tuples are highly imbalanced. That is, the number of examples of one class (majority class) in the target relation is much higher than the others (minority classes). Many existing methods thus tend to produce poor predictive performance over the underrepresented class in the data. This paper presents a strategy to deal with such imbalanced multirelational data. The method learns from multiple views (feature sets) of relational data in order to construct view learners with different awareness of the imbalanced problem. These different observations possessed by multiple view learners are then combined, in order to yield a model which has better knowledge on both the majority and minority classes in a relational database. Experiments performed on six benchmarking data sets show that the proposed method achieves promising results when compared with other popular relational data mining algorithms, in terms of the ROC curve and AUC value obtained. In particular, an important result indicates that the method is superior when the class imbalanced is very high.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.231 · 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