MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073180470 · doi:10.1109/cit.2010.103

A Novel Neural Network-Based Approach for Multiple Instance Learning

2010· article· en· W2073180470 on OpenAlexafffund
Cheng Hua Li, Iker Gondra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWeightingArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Relevance (law)Machine learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a new multiple instance learning (MIL) method based on a MIL back-propagation neural network (MIBP), which is an extension of the standard back-propagation neural network (BPNN) that uses labeled bags of instances as training data. The method finds a concept point t in the feature space which is close to instances from positive bags and far from instances in negative bags. Our method is as follows: First, train MIBP with positive and negative bags. Second, extract t from the trained MIBP. This is achieved by, for each positive bag, presenting all the instances to the trained MIBP and selecting the one with maximal output value. The t is then obtained by averaging all the extracted instances. Finally, a sensitivity analysis of the trained MIBP is performed to obtain feature relevance/weighting information. We conducted experiments to measure the performance of the obtained t when used for classification purposes. The experimental results on the musk data set and a subset of the Corel image data set show that our method has better classification performance and is more computationally efficient than other well-established MIL methods.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207