MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740792888 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2017/463

Learning Mahalanobis Distance Metric: Considering Instance Disturbance Helps

2017· article· en· W2740792888 on OpenAlexaff
Han-Jia Ye, De‐Chuan Zhan, Xue-Min Si, Yuan Jiang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMahalanobis distanceMetric (unit)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)VisualizationPattern recognition (psychology)Similarity (geometry)Machine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mahalanobis distance metric takes feature weights and correlation into account in the distance computation, which can improve the performance of many similarity/dissimilarity based methods, such as kNN. Most existing distance metric learning methods obtain metric based on the raw features and side information but neglect the reliability of them. Noises or disturbances on instances will make changes on their relationships, so as to affect the learned metric.In this paper, we claim that considering disturbance of instances may help the distance metric learning approach get a robust metric, and propose the Distance metRIc learning Facilitated by disTurbances (DRIFT) approach. In DRIFT, the noise or the disturbance of each instance is learned. Therefore, the distance between each pair of (noisy) instances can be better estimated, which facilitates side information utilization and metric learning.Experiments on prediction and visualization clearly indicate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207