MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885462593 · doi:10.5430/air.v7n2p1

Using Monte Carlo method to estimate the behavior of neural training between balanced and unbalanced data in classification of patterns

2018· article· en· W2885462593 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação Casimiro Montenegro FilhoInstituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceArtificial neural networkFeedforward neural networkArtificial intelligenceMachine learningFeed forwardTraining (meteorology)AnalogyAlgorithmData miningStatisticsMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes to develop a model-based Monte Carlo method for computationally determining the best mean squared error of training for an artificial neural network with feedforward architecture. It is applied for a particular non-linear classification problem of input/output patterns in a computational environment with abundant data. The Monte Carlo method allows computationally checking that balanced data are much better than non-balanced ones for an artificial neural network to learn by means of supervised learning. The major contribution of this investigation is that, the proposed model can be tested by analogy, considering also the fraud detection problem in credit cards, where the amount of training patterns used are high.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.593
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.025 · 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