MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548122763 · doi:10.14778/2994509.2994514

ActiveClean

2016· article· en· W2548122763 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

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMNIST databaseComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Support vector machineData miningConvergence (economics)Process (computing)Class (philosophy)Iterative and incremental developmentMachine learningArtificial intelligenceDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysts often clean dirty data iteratively--cleaning some data, executing the analysis, and then cleaning more data based on the results. We explore the iterative cleaning process in the context of statistical model training, which is an increasingly popular form of data analytics. We propose ActiveClean, which allows for progressive and iterative cleaning in statistical modeling problems while preserving convergence guarantees. ActiveClean supports an important class of models called convex loss models (e.g., linear regression and SVMs), and prioritizes cleaning those records likely to affect the results. We evaluate ActiveClean on five real-world datasets UCI Adult, UCI EEG, MNIST, IMDB, and Dollars For Docs with both real and synthetic errors. The results show that our proposed optimizations can improve model accuracy by up-to 2.5x for the same amount of data cleaned. Furthermore for a fixed cleaning budget and on all real dirty datasets, ActiveClean returns more accurate models than uniform sampling and Active Learning.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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