On Meta-learning for Dynamic Ensemble Selection
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a novel dynamic ensemble selection framework using meta-learning. The framework is divided into three steps. In the first step, the pool of classifiers is generated from the training data. The second phase is responsible to extract the meta-features and train the meta-classifier. Five distinct sets of meta-features are proposed, each one corresponding to a different criterion to measure the level of competence of a classifier for the classification of a given query sample. The meta-features are computed using the training data and used to train a meta-classifier that is able to predict whether or not a base classifier from the pool is competent enough to classify an input instance. Three different training scenarios for the training of the meta-classifier are considered: problem-dependent, problem-independent and hybrid. Experimental results show that the problem-dependent scenario provides the best result. In addition, the performance of the problem-dependent scenario is strongly correlated with the recognition rate of the system. A comparison with state-of-the-art techniques shows that the proposed-dependent approach outperforms current dynamic ensemble selection techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it