MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900379270 · doi:10.18653/v1/w18-6240

EmojiGAN: learning emojis distributions with a generative model

2018· article· en· W2900379270 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGenerative grammarAdversarial systemEmojiArtificial intelligencePopularityMachine learningImage (mathematics)Set (abstract data type)Task (project management)Generative modelNatural language processingSocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generative models have recently experienced a surge in popularity due to the development of more efficient training algorithms and increasing computational power. Models such as adversarial generative networks (GANs) have been successfully used in various areas such as computer vision, medical imaging, style transfer and natural language generation. Adversarial nets were recently shown to yield results in the image-to-text task, where given a set of images, one has to provide their corresponding text description. In this paper, we take a similar approach and propose a image-to-emoji architecture, which is trained on data from social networks and can be used to score a given picture using ideograms. We show empirical results of our algorithm on data obtained from the most influential Instagram accounts.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207