MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740275380 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1708.00088

Learning Algorithms for Active Learning

2017· preprint· en· W2740275380 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Bachman, Alessandro Sordoni, Adam Trischler

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMicrosoft (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive learning (machine learning)Computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a model that learns active learning algorithms via metalearning. For a distribution of related tasks, our model jointly learns: a data representation, an item selection heuristic, and a method for constructing prediction functions from labeled training sets. Our model uses the item selection heuristic to gather labeled training sets from which to construct prediction functions. Using the Omniglot and MovieLens datasets, we test our model in synthetic and practical settings.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.006

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 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

Citations53
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207