MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stochastic Learning-based Weak Estimation and Its Applications

2010· book-chapter· en· W2486150254 on OpenAlexaffabout
B. John Oommen, Luis Rueda

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencesortEstimatorField (mathematics)CyberneticsScheme (mathematics)Machine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been researched for more than five decades, researchers, scientists and practitioners are constantly seeking superior methods that are applicable for increasingly difficult problems. In this chapter, our aim is to consider knowledge-based novel and intelligent cybernetic approaches for problems in which the environment (or medium) is time-varying. While problems of this sort can be approached from various perspectives, including those that appropriately model the time-varying nature of the environment, in this chapter, we shall concentrate on using new estimation or “training” methods. The new methods that we propose are based on the principles of stochastic learning, and are referred to as the Stochastic Learning Weak Estimators (SLWE). An empirical analysis on synthetic data shows the advantages of the scheme for non-stationary distributions, which is where we claim to advance the state-of-the-art. We also examine how these new methods can be applicable to learning and intelligent systems, and to Pattern Recognition (PR). The chapter briefly reports conclusive results that demonstrate the superiority of the SLWE in two applications, namely in PR and data compression. The application in PR involves artificial data and real-life news reports from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). We also demonstrate its applicabilty in data compression, where the underlying distribution of the files being compressed is, again, modeled as being non-stationary. The superiority of the SLWE in both these cases is demonstrated.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207