MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123885828 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.2007.4413999

One-class learning with multi-objective genetic programming

2007· article· en· W2123885828 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Curry, Malcolm I. Heywood

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOne-class classificationArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machineComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Novelty detectionMachine learningGenetic programmingClass (philosophy)Pattern recognition (psychology)Binary classificationMulticlass classificationNoveltyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One-class classification naturally only provides one class of exemplars on which to construct the classification model. In this work, multi-objective genetic programming (GP) allows the one-class learning problem to be decomposed by multiple GP classifiers, each attempting to identify only a subset of the target data to classify. In order for GP to identify appropriate subsets of the one-class data, artificial outclass data is generated in and around the provided inclass data. A local Gaussian wrapper is employed where this reinforces a novelty detection as opposed to a discrimination approach to classification. Furthermore, a hierarchical subset selection strategy is used to deal with the necessarily large number of generated outclass exemplars. The proposed approach is demonstrated on three one-class classification datasets and was found to be competitive with a one-class SVM classifier and a binary SVM classifier.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207