A Note on Metric Properties for Some Divergence Measures: The Gaussian Case
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multivariate Gaussian densities are pervasive in pattern recognition and machine learning. A central operation that appears in most of these areas is to measure the difference between two multivariate Gaussians. Unfortunately, traditional measures based on the Kullback– Leibler (KL) divergence and the Bhattacharyya distance do not satisfy all metric axioms necessary for many algorithms. In this paper we propose a modification for the KL diver-gence and the Bhattacharyya distance, for multivariate Gaussian densities, that transforms the two measures into distance metrics. Next, we show how these metric axioms impact the unfolding process of manifold learning algorithms. Finally, we illustrate the efficacy of the proposed metrics on two different manifold learning algorithms when used for motion clustering in video data. Our results show that, in this particular application, the new proposed metrics lead to boosts in performance (at least 7%) when compared to other divergence measures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it