MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100286988 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2009.2038493

Robust Classifiers for Data Reduced via Random Projections

2010· article· en· W2100286988 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimensionality reductionRandom projectionCurse of dimensionalityPattern recognition (psychology)Random subspace methodArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Subspace topologyComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)k-nearest neighbors algorithmMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The computational cost for most classification algorithms is dependent on the dimensionality of the input samples. As the dimensionality could be high in many cases, particularly those associated with image classification, reducing the dimensionality of the data becomes a necessity. The traditional dimensionality reduction methods are data dependent, which poses certain practical problems. Random projection (RP) is an alternative dimensionality reduction method that is data independent and bypasses these problems. The nearest neighbor classifier has been used with the RP method in classification problems. To obtain higher recognition accuracy, this study looks at the robustness of RP dimensionality reduction for several recently proposed classifiers--sparse classifier (SC), group SC (along with their fast versions), and the nearest subspace classifier. Theoretical proofs are offered regarding the robustness of these classifiers to RP. The theoretical results are confirmed by experimental evaluations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.197 · 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