MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397298375

Estimating quantitative magnitudes using semantic similarity

2010· article· en· W2397298375 on OpenAlexaff
Jim Davies, Jonathan Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdjectiveSimilarity (geometry)Computer scienceSemantic similarityNatural language processingAnalogyNounArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Linguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an AI called Visuo that guesses quantitative visuospatial magnitudes (e.g., heights, lengths) given adjective-noun pairs as input (e.g., big hat). It uses a database of tagged images as memory and infers unexperienced magnitudes by analogy with semantically-related concepts in memory. We show that transferring width-height ratios from a semantically-related concept yields significantly lower error rates than using dissimilar concepts when predicting the width-height ratios of novel inputs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207