Resampling with neighbourhood bias on imbalanced domains
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
Abstract Imbalanced domains are an important problem that arises in predictive tasks causing a loss in the performance on the most relevant cases for the user. This problem has been extensively studied for classification problems, where the target variable is nominal. Recently, it was recognized that imbalanced domains occur in several other contexts and for multiple tasks, such as regression tasks, where the target variable is continuous. This paper focuses on imbalanced domains in both classification and regression tasks. Resampling strategies are among the most successful approaches to address imbalanced domains. In this work, we propose variants of existing resampling strategies that are able to take into account the information regarding the neighbourhood of the examples. Instead of performing sampling uniformly, our proposals bias the strategies to reinforce some regions of the data sets. With an extensive set of experiments, we provide evidence of the advantage of introducing a neighbourhood bias in the resampling strategies for both classification and regression tasks with imbalanced data sets.
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 | 0.001 | 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