MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968805547 · doi:10.1080/02664760500168648

Interpretable dimension reduction

2005· article· en· W1968805547 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Statistics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Analysis with R
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityAcadia University
FundersUniversity of WaterlooNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisLinear subspaceDimensionality reductionConstraint (computer-aided design)Dimension (graph theory)MathematicsHomogeneity (statistics)Reduction (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceAlgorithmStatisticsArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of high-dimensional data often begins with the identification of lower dimensional subspaces. Principal component analysis (PCA) is a dimension reduction technique that identifies linear combinations of variables along which most variation occurs or which "reconstruct" the original variables the best. For example, many temperature readings may be taken in a production process when in fact there are just a few underlying variables driving the process. A problem with principal components is that the linear combinations can seem quite arbitrary. To make them more interpretable, we introduce constraints on the coefficients of the linear combination. Two classes of constraints are considered - those in which coefficients are equal to one of a small number of values (homogeneous constraints), and those in which many coefficients are set to 0 (sparsity constraints). The resultant interpretable directions may be calculated to be "close" to the original principal components, or...

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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.235 · 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