MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989327351 · doi:10.1109/ictai.2010.21

Particle Swarm Classification for High Dimensional Data Sets

2010· article· en· W1989327351 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationCurse of dimensionalityCardinality (data modeling)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Data setSwarm behaviourStatistical classificationClass (philosophy)Dispersion (optics)Data miningAlgorithmArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work studies the use of Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) as a classification technique. Beyond assessing classification accuracy, it investigates the following questions: does PSO present limitations for high dimensional application domains? Is it less efficient for multi class problems? To answer the questions, an experimental set up was realized that uses three high dimensional data sets. Our results are that, depending on the mechanisms controlling confinement and dispersion in the PSO algorithm, the classification accuracy varied with the dimensionality of the data and the cardinality of the output space.

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)0.001
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 score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.252 · 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