MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295966731 · doi:10.1109/icip.2015.7351019

Hierarchical tucker tensor regression: Application to brain imaging data analysis

2015· article· en· W2295966731 on OpenAlexaff
Ming Hou, Brahim Chaib-draa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicTensor decomposition and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimension (graph theory)Tensor (intrinsic definition)Rank (graph theory)Regression analysisRegressionLinear regressionMathematicsCovariateArtificial intelligenceContrast (vision)Tucker decompositionComputer scienceStatisticsApplied mathematicsCombinatoricsPure mathematicsTensor decomposition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel generalized linear tensor regression model, which takes tensor-variate inputs as covariates and finds low-rank (almost) best approximation of regression coefficient arrays using hierarchical Tucker decomposition. With limited sample size, our model is highly compact and extremely efficient as it requires only O(dr3+ dpr) parameters for order d tensors of mode size p and rank r, which avoids the exponential growth in d, in contrast to O(rd+ dpr) parameters of Tucker regression modeling. Our model also maintains the flexibility like classical Tucker regression by allowing distinct ranks on different modes according to a dimension tree structure. We evaluate our new model on both synthetic data and real-life MRI images to show its effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTensor decomposition and applicationsFrench-language works237,207