MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180453814 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v28i1.8980

Learning the Structure of Probabilistic Graphical Models with an Extended Cascading Indian Buffet Process

2014· article· en· W2180453814 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphical modelDirected acyclic graphComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceProcess (computing)Machine learningContext (archaeology)Probabilistic logicTheoretical computer scienceExtension (predicate logic)GraphAlgorithmProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an extension of the cascading Indian buffet process (CIBP) intended to learning arbitrary directed acyclic graph structures as opposed to the CIBP, which is limited to purely layered structures. The extended cascading Indian buffet process (eCIBP) essentially consists in adding an extra sampling step to the CIBP to generate connections between non-consecutive layers. In the context of graphical model structure learning, the proposed approach allows learning structures having an unbounded number of hidden random variables and automatically selecting the model complexity. We evaluated the extended process on multivariate density estimation and structure identification tasks by measuring the structure complexity and predictive performance. The results suggest the extension leads to extracting simpler graphs without scarifying predictive precision.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.251 · 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