MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119480209 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2009.2021964

Mine Classification With Imbalanced Data

2009· article· en· W2119480209 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 Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterComputer scienceSonarOne-class classificationData miningStatistical classificationClass (philosophy)Data setRadarLogistic regressionSupport vector machineSet (abstract data type)Classification ruleArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many remote-sensing classification problems, the number of targets (e.g., mines) present is very small compared with the number of clutter objects. Traditional classification approaches usually ignore this class imbalance, causing performance to suffer accordingly. In contrast, the recently developed infinitely imbalanced logistic regression (IILR) algorithm explicitly addresses class imbalance in its formulation. We describe this algorithm and give the details necessary to employ it for remote-sensing data sets that are characterized by class imbalance. The method is applied to the problem of mine classification on three real measured data sets. Specifically, classification performance using the IILR algorithm is shown to exceed that of a standard logistic regression approach on two land-mine data sets collected with a ground-penetrating radar and on one underwater-mine data set collected with a sidescan sonar.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · 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