MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100168598 · doi:10.1145/1281192.1281261

Partial example acquisition in cost-sensitive learning

2007· article· en· W2100168598 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIncremental learningData acquisitionMachine learningLabeled dataSet (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceIdeal (ethics)Training setData miningData set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is often expensive to acquire data in real-world data mining applications. Most previous data mining and machine learning research, however, assumes that a fixed set of training examples is given. In this paper, we propose an online cost-sensitive framework that allows a learner to dynamically acquire examples as it learns, and to decide the ideal number of examples needed to minimize the total cost. We also propose a new strategy for Partial Example Acquisition (PAS), in which the learner can acquire examples with a subset of attribute values to reduce the data acquisition cost. Experiments on UCI datasets show that the new PAS strategy is an effective method in reducing the total cost for data acquisition.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207