MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970814699 · doi:10.1137/110851377

Sparse Orthogonal Linear Discriminant Analysis

2012· article· en· W1970814699 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

VenueSIAM Journal on Scientific Computing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonalityMathematicsLinear discriminant analysisLinear mapNorm (philosophy)AlgorithmMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsPure mathematicsGeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, sparse orthogonal linear discriminant analysis (OLDA) is studied. The main contributions of the present work include the following: (i) all minimum Frobenius-norm/dimension solutions of the optimization problem used for establishing OLDA are characterized explicitly; and (ii) this explicit characterization leads to two numerical algorithms for computing a sparse linear transformation for OLDA. The first is based on the gradient flow approach while the second is a sequential linear Bregman method. We experiment with real world datasets to illustrate that the sequential linear Bregman method is much better than the gradient flow approach. The sequential linear Bregman method always achieves comparable classification accuracy with the normal OLDA, satisfactory sparsity and orthogonality, and acceptable CPU times.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.245 · 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