MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W159954324

Memory (and Time) Efficient Sequential Monte Carlo

2014· article· en· W159954324 on OpenAlexaff
Seong-Hwan Jun, Alexandre Bouchard-C t

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Machine Learning · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceParticle filterResamplingMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmConsistency (knowledge bases)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Memory efficiency is an important issue in Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) algorithms, arising for example in inference of high-dimensional latent variables via Rao-Blackwellized SMC algorithms, where the size of individual particles combined with the required number of particles can stress the main memory. Standard SMC methods have a memory requirement that scales linearly in the number of particles present at all stage of the algorithm. Our contribution is a simple scheme that makes the memory cost of SMC methods depends on the number of distinct particles that survive resampling. We show that this difference has a large empirical impact on the quality of the approximation in realistic scenarios, and also--since memory access is generally slow--on the running time. The method is based on a two pass generation of the particles, which are represented implicitly in the first pass. We parameterize the accuracy of our algorithm with a memory budget rather than with a fixed number of particles. Our algorithm adaptively selects an optimal number of particle to exploit this fixed memory budget. We show that this adaptation does not interfere with the usual consistency guarantees that come with SMC algorithms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Machine LearningSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207