MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141969549 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2007.366991

Incorporating Training Errors for Large Margin HMMS Under Semi-Definite Programming Framework

2007· article· en· W2141969549 on OpenAlexaff
Hui Jiang, Xinwei Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMargin (machine learning)Computer scienceDiscriminative modelConvergence (economics)Function (biology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Support vector machineArtificial intelligenceError functionAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study how to incorporate training errors in large margin estimation (LME) under semi-definite programming (SDP) framework. Like soft-margin SVM, we propose to optimize a new objective function which linearly combines the minimum margin among positive tokens and an average error function of all negative tokens. The new method is named as soft-LME. It is shown the new soft-LME problem can still be converted into an SDP problem if we properly define the average error function of all negative tokens based on their discriminative functions. Some preliminary results on TIDIGITS show that the soft-LML/SDP method yields modest performance gain when training error rates are significant. Moreover, it is also shown that the soft-LML/SDP can achieve much faster convergence for all cases which we have investigated.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207