Fast parzen window density estimator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parzen Windows (PW) is a popular nonparametric density estimation technique. In general the smoothing kernel is placed on all available data points, which makes the algorithm computationally expensive when large datasets are considered. Several approaches have been proposed in the past to reduce the computational cost of PW either by subsampling the dataset, or by imposing a sparsity in the density model. Typically the latter requires a rather involved and complex learning process. In this paper, we propose a new simple and efficient kernel-based method for non-parametric probability density function (pdf) estimation on large datasets. We cover the entire data space by a set of fixed radii hyper-balls with densities represented by full covariance Gaussians. The accuracy and efficiency of the new estimator is verified on both synthetic dataset and large datasets of astronomical simulations of the galaxy disruption process. Experiments demonstrate that the estimation accuracy of the new estimator is comparable to that of the previous approaches but with a significant speed-up. We also show that the pdf learnt by the new estimator could used to automatically find the most matching set in large scale astronomical simulations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".