MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395916875 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1605.06394

Bayesian Hyperparameter Optimization for Ensemble Learning

2016· preprint· en· W2395916875 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

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperparameterHyperparameter optimizationBayesian optimizationEnsemble learningComputer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBayesian probabilityClassifier (UML)Greedy algorithmAlgorithmSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we bridge the gap between hyperparameter optimization and ensemble learning by performing Bayesian optimization of an ensemble with regards to its hyperparameters. Our method consists in building a fixed-size ensemble, optimizing the configuration of one classifier of the ensemble at each iteration of the hyperparameter optimization algorithm, taking into consideration the interaction with the other models when evaluating potential performances. We also consider the case where the ensemble is to be reconstructed at the end of the hyperparameter optimization phase, through a greedy selection over the pool of models generated during the optimization. We study the performance of our proposed method on three different hyperparameter spaces, showing that our approach is better than both the best single model and a greedy ensemble construction over the models produced by a standard Bayesian optimization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.154 · 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