MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898491562 · doi:10.1109/icde.2018.00271

Enhancing Binary Classification by Modeling Uncertain Boundary in Three-Way Decisions (Extended Abstract)

2018· article· en· W2898491562 on OpenAlexaff
Yuefeng Li, Libiao Zhang, Yue Xu, Yiyu Yao, Raymond Y.K. Lau, Yutong Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText and Document Classification Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityClass (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)Boundary (topology)Artificial intelligenceBinary classificationMachine learningTraining setSubject (documents)Information retrievalSupport vector machineWorld Wide WebDatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Text classification techniques are playing a crucial role in identifying relevant texts from a large data set, e.g., various online crimes such as Cyberbullying, terrorist recruiting, propaganda or attack planning. Until now, supervised deep learning has brought about breakthroughs in processing multimedia data; however, there was no good practical way to harvest this opportunity for text classification because acquiring and maintaining a massive amount of training examples are too expensive for a large number of categories (e.g., Yahoo! taxonomy contains nearly 300,000 categories and the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) contains 394,070 subjects). Therefore, the question of how to effectively learn from sparse or small set of training examples is crucial for the true success of text classification. Semi-supervised approaches have been proposed for this challenge, which usually use a pair or several existing classifiers to extend a small training set. However, extracted pseudo training samples are uncertain because they are determined by a machine rather than people. Also, the massive volume and high variability of text data are creating a number of challenging issues such as the scalability and complicated relations between words. There are two fundamental issues with regards to the performance of existing classifiers: overlook and overload. Overlook means that some objects relevant to a class have been omitted, whereas overload means that some objects assigned to a class are actually not relevant to that class. The two issues are even more serious in the following two cases: (1) large uncertain boundary - the decision boundary between two classes includes many mixed examples (e.g., relevant and nonrelevant documents together), and (2) unbalanced classes - one class (e.g., information about terrorist attacks) is much smaller than another class (e.g., normal descriptions). We propose a three-way decision model [1] for dealing with the uncertain boundary for improving text classification performance based on rough set techniques and centroid solution. It aims to understand the uncertain boundary through partitioning the training samples into three regions (the positive, boundary and negative regions) by two main boundary vectors created from the labeled positive and negative training subsets, respectively, and further resolve the objects in the boundary region by two derived boundary vectors produced according to the structure of the boundary region. Four decision rules are proposed from the training process and applied to the incoming documents for more precise classification. The experimental results on the standard data sets RCV1 and Reuters-21578 show that the usage of boundary vectors is very effective and efficient for dealing with uncertainties of the decision boundary, and the proposed model has significantly improved the performance of binary text classification in terms of F1 measure and AUC area compared with six other popular baseline models.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicText and Document Classification TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207