Discriminative parameter learning of general Bayesian network classifiers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Greiner and Zhou (1988) presented ELR, a discriminative parameter-learning algorithm that maximizes conditional likelihood (CL) for a fixed Bayesian belief network (BN) structure, and demonstrated that it often produces classifiers that are more accurate than the ones produced using the generative approach (OFE), which finds maximal likelihood parameters. This is especially true when learning parameters for incorrect structures, such as naive Bayes (NB). In searching for algorithms to learn better BN classifiers, this paper uses ELR to learn parameters of more nearly correct BN structures - e.g., of a general Bayesian network (GBN) learned from a structure-learning algorithm by Greiner and Zhou (2002). While OFE typically produces more accurate classifiers with GBN (vs. NB), we show that ELR does not, when the training data is not sufficient for the GBN structure learner to produce a good model. Our empirical studies also suggest that the better the BN structure is, the less advantages ELR has over OFE, for classification purposes. ELR learning on NB (i.e., with little structural knowledge) still performs about the same as OFE on GBN in classification accuracy, over a large number of standard benchmark datasets.
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 | 0.013 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".