MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2206560168 · doi:10.1145/1390156.1390192

Pointwise exact bootstrap distributions of cost curves

2008· article· en· W2206560168 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Dugas, David M. Gadoury

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidence intervalResamplingPointwiseReceiver operating characteristicClassifier (UML)MathematicsComputationStatisticsBinary numberComplement (music)Coverage probabilityBinary classificationComputer scienceConfidence distributionAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cost curves have recently been introduced as an alternative or complement to ROC curves in order to visualize binary classifiers performance. Of importance to both cost and ROC curves is the computation of confidence intervals along with the curves themselves so that the reliability of a classifier's performance can be assessed. Computing confidence intervals for the difference in performance between two classifiers allows the determination of whether one classifier performs significantly better than another. A simple procedure to obtain confidence intervals for costs or the difference between two costs, under various operating conditions, is to perform bootstrap resampling of the test set. In this paper, we derive exact bootstrap distributions for these values and use these dstributions to obtain confidence intervals, under various operating conditions. Performances of these confidence intervals are measured in terms of coverage accuracies. Simulations show excellent results.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImbalanced Data Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207