MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2904658698 · doi:10.1109/lsc.2018.8572090

Fitting Rank Order Data in the Age of Context

2018· article· en· W2904658698 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Dick, James R. Green

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceRank (graph theory)Order (exchange)Data miningMathematicsGeologyCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rank order data are pervasive in science and in our daily lived experience. With the advent of high performance computing and the commensurate increase in available data, the opportunity to capture the overall distribution of values by means of nonparametric curve fitting enables the identification of exceptional points in large datasets. With a rank order structure, these distributions may exhibit a “knee” delineating a threshold between exceptional points and those of the baseline. Given an accurate characterization of the distribution of prediction scores, including careful identification of the knee, we have previously shown that predictive performance can be significantly improved by leveraging this “context”. This paper examines the nonparametric characterization of such distributions. Locally weighted regression (LOESS) is a widely used nonparametric approach to curve fitting. Here, we revisit the assumptions behind the selection of kernel functions for nonparametric curve fitting of biological and biomedical data exhibiting rare or exceptional instances. We propose a new linear asymmetric kernel function and compare it to the commonly used tricube kernel used in LOESS. We evaluate its ability to fit rank order data in the domain of protein-protein interaction prediction. The proposed linear kernel significantly improved predictive performance ) of two state-of-the-art predictors and promises to be widely applicable in related machine learning pipelines and nonparametric regression tasks.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and Applications→French-language works237,207→