On utilizing search methods to select subspace dimensions for kernel-based nonlinear subspace classifiers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Kernel-based Nonlinear Subspace (KNS) methods, the subspace dimensions have a strong influence on the performance of the subspace classifier. In order to get a high classification accuracy, a large dimension is generally required. However, if the chosen subspace dimension is too large, it leads to a low performance due to the overlapping of the resultant subspaces and, if it is too small, it increases the classification error due to the poor resulting approximation. The most common approach is of an ad hoc nature, which selects the dimensions based on the so-called cumulative proportion computed from the kernel matrix for each class. In this paper, we propose a new method of systematically and efficiently selecting optimal or near-optimal subspace dimensions for KNS classifiers using a search strategy and a heuristic function termed the Overlapping criterion. The rationale for this function has been motivated in the body of the paper. The task of selecting optimal subspace dimensions is reduced to finding the best ones from a given problem-domain solution space using this criterion as a heuristic function. Thus, the search space can be pruned to very efficiently find the best solution. Our experimental results demonstrate that the proposed mechanism selects the dimensions efficiently without sacrificing the classification accuracy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".