An Efficient Greedy Method for Unsupervised Feature 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 data mining applications, data instances are typically described by a huge number of features. Most of these features are irrelevant or redundant, which negatively affects the efficiency and effectiveness of different learning algorithms. The selection of relevant features is a crucial task which can be used to allow a better understanding of data or improve the performance of other learning tasks. Although the selection of relevant features has been extensively studied in supervised learning, feature selection with the absence of class labels is still a challenging task. This paper proposes a novel method for unsupervised feature selection, which efficiently selects features in a greedy manner. The paper first defines an effective criterion for unsupervised feature selection which measures the reconstruction error of the data matrix based on the selected subset of features. The paper then presents a novel algorithm for greedily minimizing the reconstruction error based on the features selected so far. The greedy algorithm is based on an efficient recursive formula for calculating the reconstruction error. Experiments on real data sets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm in comparison to the state-of-the-art methods for unsupervised feature selection.
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