MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117847370 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2007.896406

Scaling Genetic Programming to Large Datasets Using Hierarchical Dynamic Subset Selection

2007· letter· en· W2117847370 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Curry, Peter Lichodzijewski, Malcolm I. Heywood

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRSSSelection (genetic algorithm)HeuristicsGenetic programmingBlock (permutation group theory)BenchmarkingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceGenetic algorithmOverhead (engineering)Binary classificationData miningAlgorithmMathematicsSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The computational overhead of genetic programming (GP) may be directly addressed without recourse to hardware solutions using active learning algorithms based on the random or dynamic subset selection heuristics (RSS or DSS). This correspondence begins by presenting a family of hierarchical DSS algorithms: RSS-DSS, cascaded RSS-DSS, and the balanced block DSS algorithm, where the latter has not been previously introduced. Extensive benchmarking over four unbalanced real-world binary classification problems with 30000-500000 training exemplars demonstrates that both the cascade and balanced block algorithms are able to reduce the likelihood of degenerates while providing a significant improvement in classification accuracy relative to the original RSS-DSS algorithm. Moreover, comparison with GP trained without an active learning algorithm indicates that classification performance is not compromised, while training is completed in minutes as opposed to half a day.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.272
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

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics)Same topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207