MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071225339 · doi:10.1117/12.550982

An automated classification algorithm for multiwavelength data

2004· article· en· W2071225339 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yanxia Zhang, A-Li Luo, Yongheng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Naval ObservatoryRyerson University
KeywordsComputer scienceNaive Bayes classifierClassifier (UML)Feature selectionArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)PreprocessorData pre-processingAlgorithmROSATFeature (linguistics)GalaxyAstrophysicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The important step of data preprocessing of data mining is feature selection. Feature selection is used to improve the performance of data mining algorithms by removing the irrelevant and redundant features. By positional cross-identification, the multi-wavelength data of 1656 active galactic nuclei (AGNs), 3718 stars, and 173 galaxies are obtained from optical (USNO-A2.0), X-ray (ROSAT), and infrared (Two Micron All- Sky Survey) bands. In this paper we applied a kind of filter approach named ReliefF to select features from the multi-wavelength data. Then we put forward the naive Bayes classifier to classify the objects with the feature subsets and compare the results with and without feature selection, and those with and without adding weights to features. The result shows that the naive Bayes classifier based on ReliefF algorithms is robust and efficient to preselect AGN candidates.

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)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207