Effective multi-label active learning for text classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Labeling text data is quite time-consuming but essential for automatic text classification. Especially, manually creating multiple labels for each document may become impractical when a very large amount of data is needed for training multi-label text classifiers. To minimize the human-labeling efforts, we propose a novel multi-label active learning approach which can reduce the required labeled data without sacrificing the classification accuracy. Traditional active learning algorithms can only handle single-label problems, that is, each data is restricted to have one label. Our approach takes into account the multi-label information, and select the unlabeled data which can lead to the largest reduction of the expected model loss. Specifically, the model loss is approximated by the size of version space, and the reduction rate of the size of version space is optimized with Support Vector Machines (SVM). An effective label prediction method is designed to predict possible labels for each unlabeled data point, and the expected loss for multi-label data is approximated by summing up losses on all labels according to the most confident result of label prediction. Experiments on several real-world data sets (all are publicly available) demonstrate that our approach can obtain promising classification result with much fewer labeled data than state-of-the-art 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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".