Weighted Pseudometric Discriminatory Power Improvement Using a Bayesian Logistic Regression Model Based on a Variational Method
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 this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of a Bayesian logistic regression model to compute the weights of a pseudo-metric, in order to improve its discriminatory capacity and thereby increase image retrieval accuracy. In the proposed Bayesian model, the prior knowledge of the observations is incorporated and the posterior distribution is approximated by a tractable Gaussian form using variational transformation and Jensen's inequality, which allow a fast and straightforward computation of the weights. The pseudo-metric makes use of the compressed and quantized versions of wavelet decomposed feature vectors, and in our previous work, the weights were adjusted by classical logistic regression model. A comparative evaluation of the Bayesian and classical logistic regression models is performed for content-based image retrieval as well as for other classification tasks, in a decontextualized evaluation framework. In this same framework, we compare the Bayesian logistic regression model to some relevant state-of-the-art classification algorithms. Experimental results show that the Bayesian logistic regression model outperforms these linear classification algorithms, and is a significantly better tool than the classical logistic regression model to compute the pseudo-metric weights and improve retrieval and classification performance. Finally, we perform a comparison with results obtained by other retrieval methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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