MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118536426 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2012.6288280

A heteroscedastic extension of LDA based on multi-class matusita affinity

2012· article· en· W2118536426 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Shahin Mahanta, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomoscedasticityHeteroscedasticityLinear discriminant analysisPairwise comparisonPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceGeneralizationMathematicsComputational complexity theoryComputer scienceExtension (predicate logic)Feature extractionAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear discriminant analysis (LDA), a conventional feature extraction technique, is a homoscedastic solution and ignores the second order information of the data. A heteroscedastic extension of LDA has been previously proposed which relies on the average pairwise Chernoff distances of the classes. However, in a multi-class scenario with number of classesC >; 2, the average of pairwise distances is not directly related to the classification error rate. Furthermore, the corresponding method imposes a high computational complexity of order O(C(C - 1)). This paper proposes an inherently multi-class heteroscedastic extension of LDA based on Matusita's separability measure, a multi-class generalization of the Chernoff distance which is related to multi-class error bounds. The proposed feature extractor can be trained non-iteratively with computational complexity of O(C). Experimental comparisons with the Chernoffmethod demonstrate both a performance improvement when estimated parameters are used, and a reduction of factor C - 1 in the computational load as predicted.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207