MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2575147726

EBEK: exemplar-based kernel preserving embedding

2016· article· en· W2575147726 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Elbagoury, Rania Ibrahim, Mohamed S. Kamel, Fakhri Karray

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEmbeddingKernel (algebra)InterpretabilityArtificial intelligenceBasis (linear algebra)GRASPMachine learningData miningKernel methodData pointPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsSupport vector machine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid increase in the available data, it becomes computationally harder to extract useful information. Thus, several techniques like PCA were proposed to embed high-dimensional data into low-dimensional latent space. However, these techniques don't take the data relations into account. This motivated the development of other techniques like MDS and LLE which preserve the relations between the data instances. Nonetheless, all these techniques still use latent features, which are difficult for data analysts to understand and grasp the information encoded in them. In this work, a new embedding technique is proposed to mitigate the previous problems by projecting the data to a space described by few points (i.e, exemplars) which preserves the relations between the data points. The proposed method Exemplar-based Kernel Preserving (EBEK) embedding is shown theoretically to achieve the lowest reconstruction error of the kernel matrix. Using EBEK in approximate nearest neighbor task shows its ability to outperform related work by up to 60% in the recall while maintaining a good running time. In addition, our interpretability experiments show that EBEK's selected basis are more understandable than the latent basis in images datasets.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207