Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we present a method to recognize an object class by learning a statistical model of the class. The probabilistic model decomposes the appearance of an object class into a set of local parts and models the appearance, relative location, co-occurrence, and scale of these parts. However, in many object classification approaches that use local features, learning the parameters is exponential in the number of parts because of the problem of matching local features in the image to parts in the model. In this paper we present a learning method that overcomes this difficulty by adding new parts to the model incrementally, using the Maximum-Likelihood framework. When we add a part to the model, a set of candidate parts are selected and the part that increases the likelihood of the data the most is added to the model. Once this part is added to the model, the parameters for all parts up to this point are updated using EM. The learning and recognition in this approach are translation and scale invariant, robust to background clutter, and has less restriction on the number of parts in the model. The validity of the approach is demonstrated on a real world dataset, where the approach is competitive with others, and where the learning for a rich model is much faster than previous approaches.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".