Bibliographic record
Abstract
A main problem in machine learning is to predict the response variables of a test set given the training data and its corresponding response variables. A predictive model can perform satisfactorily only if the training data is an appropriate representative of the test data. This is usually reflected in the assumption that the training data and the test data are drawn from the same underlying probability distribution. However, the assumption may not be correct in many applications for various reasons. We propose a method based on kernel distribution embedding and Hilbert-Schmidt Independence Criterion (HSIC) to address this problem. The proposed method explores a new representation of the data in a new feature space with two properties: (i) the distributions of the training and the test data sets are as close as possible in the new feature space, and (ii) the important structural information of the data is preserved. The algorithm can reduce the dimensionality of the data while it preserves the aforementioned properties and therefore it can be seen as a dimensionality reduction method as well. Our method has a closed-form solution and the experimental results show that it works well in practice.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".