MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910978492 · doi:10.1111/coin.12071

Mining Evolving Data Streams with Particle Filters

2015· article· en· W1910978492 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

VenueComputational Intelligence · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Stream Mining Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResamplingComputer scienceData streamData stream miningParticle filterLogistic regressionData miningGradient descentArtificial intelligenceKey (lock)Feature (linguistics)Noise (video)Filter (signal processing)Pattern recognition (psychology)RegressionMachine learningArtificial neural networkMathematicsStatisticsKalman filter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a particle filter‐based learning method, PF‐LR, for learning logistic regression models from evolving data streams. The method inherently handles concept drifts in a data stream and is able to learn an ensemble of logistic regression models with particle filtering. A key feature of PF‐LR is that in its resampling, step particles are sampled from the ones that maximize the classification accuracy on the current data batch. Our experiments show that PF‐LR gives good performance, even with relatively small batch sizes. It reacts to concept drifts quicker than conventional particle filters while being robust to noise. In addition, PF‐LR learns more accurate models and is more computationally efficient than the gradient descent method for learning logistic regression models. Furthermore, we evaluate PF‐LR on both synthetic and real data sets and find that PF‐LR outperforms some other state‐of‐the‐art streaming mining algorithms on most of the data sets tested.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.187 · 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