Cost-Effective Active Learning for Hierarchical Multi-Label Classification
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active learning reduces the labeling cost by actively querying labels for the most valuable data. It is particularly important for multi-label learning, where the annotation cost is rather high because each instance may have multiple labels simultaneously. In many multi-label tasks, the labels are organized into hierarchies from coarse to fine. The labels at different levels of the hierarchy contribute differently to the model training, and also have diverse annotation costs. In this paper, we propose a multi-label active learning approach to exploit the label hierarchies for cost-effective queries. By incorporating the potential contribution of ancestor and descendant labels, a novel criterion is proposed to estimate the informativeness of each candidate query. Further, a subset selection method is introduced to perform active batch selection by balancing the informativeness and cost of each instance-label pair. Experimental results validate the effectiveness of both the proposed criterion and the selection method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it