Prediction-based classification using learning on Riemannian manifolds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is concerned with learning from predictions. Predictions are obtained by ensemble of classifiers such as random forests (RF) or extra-trees. One assumes that estimators are semi independent so that they can be considered as prediction space. Hence we project our feature vector to the space of estimators obtaining responses from each of them. The responses for RFs are conditional class probabilities. The responses might be considered as projections onto some direction in quasi-orthogonal space which are decision trees of a RF. After that one creates the connected Riemannian manifold by computing a matrix of pairwise products of predictions for all trees in the RF. These matrices are symmetric and positive definite which is a necessary and sufficient condition to have a connected Riemannian manifold (R manifold). Because outputs of trees are conditional probabilities we have to create as many such matrices as there are classes. Stacking all these matrices together we obtain a tensor which is passed to Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) for learning. We tested our algorithm on 11 datasets from UCI repository representing difficult classification problems. The results show very fast learning and convergence of loss and prediction accuracy. The proposed algorithm outperforms feature-based classical classifier ensembles (RFs and extra-trees) for every tested dataset from UCI repository.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".