MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005625450 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2013.6567720

Non-linear sparse and group sparse classifier

2013· article· en· W2005625450 on OpenAlexaff
Angshul Majumdar, Rabab Ward

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)Sparse approximationPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceLinear classifierClass (philosophy)Sample complexityOptimization problemGeneralizationMachine learningMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently there has been an interest in a new classification model, where it is assumed that the training samples for a particular class form a linear basis for any new test sample belonging to that class. This assumption led to two successful classification methods called the Sparse Classifier (SC) and the Group Sparse Classifier (GSC). This work generalizes the previous linearity assumption and accounts for non-linear functional relationship between the training samples of a class and a new test sample belonging to that class. Such a generalization requires solving sparse/group-sparse optimization problems with non-linear constraints. We develop exact optimization based algorithms as well as approximate (fast) algorithms to solve such hitherto un-addressed optimization problem. Results show that significant improvement can be achieved by the proposed Non-Linear Sparse Classifiers compared to previous Sparse/Group Sparse Classifiers.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207