A new design of multiple classifier system and its application to the classification of time series data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose the scheme of multiple input representation-adaptive ensemble generation and aggregation(MIR-AEGA) for the classification of time series data. MIR-AEGA employs a set of heterogeneous classifiers, each of which takes a different representation of time series data as the input. MIR-AEGA adopts an "overfitting and selection" strategy. In the training phase, different ensembles of classifiers are adaptively generated by fitting the validation data ' globally in different degrees. The test data are then classified by each of the generated ensembles. The final decision is made by taking consideration into both the ability of each ensemble to fit the validation data locally and the possible overfitting effects. We claim that MIR-AEGA has two advantages (1) By using multiple representations, it exploits the temporal information of time series data as much as possible, thus could improve the overall performance (2) By tweaking the trade-off between the ability to fit the validation data and the overfitting effects, we expect the performance of this method is reliable in different situations. In this paper, the performance of MIR- AEGA is also assessed experimentally in comparison with other benchmark techniques. The experimental results demonstrate the good performance and the reliability of MIR-AEGA for the classification of time series data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".