MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784015834 · doi:10.1109/icmla.2017.000-8

Histogram-Based Asymmetric Relabeling for Learning from Only Positive and Unlabeled Data

2017· article· en· W2784015834 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistogramComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Labeled dataMachine learningData miningImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we demonstrate how to use asymmetric data relabeling based on feature histograms as a pre-processing step for improving the overall classification performance of different classifiers in situations when only positive and unlabeled data is available. Additionally, this strategy can be used to identify with some level of confidence those data instances that should probably be labeled as positive. Moreover, this approach can be adapted to assess the quality of a given dataset, in terms of how many positive instances are not labeled. We examine our approach using synthetic data and demonstrate its applicability using real, publicly available data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0020.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207