MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052112662 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.168

Optimizing Nondecomposable Loss Functions in Structured Prediction

2012· article· en· W2052112662 on OpenAlexafffund
Mani Ranjbar, Tian Lan, Yang Wang, Stephen N. Robinovitch, Ze-Nian Li, Greg Mori

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSegmentationPascal (unit)Structured predictionPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningImage segmentationPiecewiseInferenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop an algorithm for structured prediction with nondecomposable performance measures. The algorithm learns parameters of Markov Random Fields (MRFs) and can be applied to multivariate performance measures. Examples include performance measures such as Fβ score (natural language processing), intersection over union (object category segmentation), Precision/Recall at k (search engines), and ROC area (binary classifiers). We attack this optimization problem by approximating the loss function with a piecewise linear function. The loss augmented inference forms a Quadratic Program (QP), which we solve using LP relaxation. We apply this approach to two tasks: object class-specific segmentation and human action retrieval from videos. We show significant improvement over baseline approaches that either use simple loss functions or simple scoring functions on the PASCAL VOC and H3D Segmentation datasets, and a nursing home action recognition dataset.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207