MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884529360 · doi:10.3233/jifs-171812

Learning regression problems by using classifiers

2018· article· en· W2884529360 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

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom forestEnsemble learningClassifier (UML)Computer scienceRegressionArtificial intelligenceRandom subspace methodBinary classificationMachine learningEnsemble forecastingRegression analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Binary numberData miningSupport vector machineMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regression via Classification (RvC) is a process to solve a regression problem by using a classifier. An ensemble consists of many models, in which the final result is the combination of the results of these individual models. In this paper, two RvC ensemble methods are proposed. In the first ensemble method, the output of the ensemble method is modified to achieve the final output. A formula is derived in this paper for this purpose. In the second method, a new approach is proposed to compute the output of each model of an ensemble. It is shown that an accurate binary classifier can be transformed into an accurate regression method with the proposed methods. It is also shown experimentally, by using popular Random Forests as a classifier in the proposed ensemble methods against Random Forests as a regression method, the effectiveness of the proposed RvC ensemble methods.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.244 · 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