FAST APPROXIMATE NEAREST NEIGHBORS WITH AUTOMATIC ALGORITHM CONFIGURATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
nearest-neighbors search, randomized kd-trees, hierarchical k-means tree, clustering. For many computer vision problems, the most time consuming component consists of nearest neighbor matching in high-dimensional spaces. There are no known exact algorithms for solving these high-dimensional problems that are faster than linear search. Approximate algorithms are known to provide large speedups with only minor loss in accuracy, but many such algorithms have been published with only minimal guidance on selecting an algorithm and its parameters for any given problem. In this paper, we describe a system that answers the question, “What is the fastest approximate nearest-neighbor algorithm for my data? ” Our system will take any given dataset and desired degree of precision and use these to automatically determine the best algorithm and parameter values. We also describe a new algorithm that applies priority search on hierarchical k-means trees, which we have found to provide the best known performance on many datasets. After testing a range of alternatives, we have found that multiple randomized k-d trees provide the best performance for other datasets. We are releasing public domain code that implements these approaches. This library provides about one order of magnitude improvement in query time over the best previously available software and provides fully automated parameter selection. 1
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 | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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".