MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054903053 · doi:10.1109/icif.2005.1591923

Sequential auxiliary particle belief propagation

2005· article· en· W2054903053 on OpenAlexafffund
Mark Briers, Arnaud Doucet, Sumeetpal S. Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUniversity of British ColumbiaQinetiQ
KeywordsBelief propagationGraphical modelApproximate inferenceInferenceComputer scienceParticle filterAlgorithmGaussianMonte Carlo methodMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discloses a novel algorithm for efficient inference in undirected graphical models using sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) based numerical approximation techniques. The methodology developed, titled "auxiliary particle belief propagation", extends the applicability of the much celebrated (Loopy) belief propagation (LBP) algorithm to non-linear, non-Gaussian models, whilst retaining a computational cost that is linear in the number of sample points (or particles). Furthermore, we provide an additional extension to this technique by analyzing temporally evolving graphical models, a problem which remains largely unexplored in the scientific literature. The work presented is thus a general framework that can be applied to a plethora of novel distributed fusion problems. In this paper, we apply our inference algorithm to the (sequential problem of) articulated object tracking.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations63
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207