MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943204979 · doi:10.1109/dsw.2019.8755559

Introducing Graph Smoothness Loss for Training Deep Learning Architectures

2019· preprint· en· W2943204979 on OpenAlexaff
Myriam Bontonou, Carlos Lassance, Ghouthi Boukli Hacene, Vincent Gripon, Jian Tang, Antonio Ortega

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsHEC MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)SmoothnessArtificial intelligenceCross entropyGraphEntropy (arrow of time)Deep learningMachine learningAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Theoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a novel loss function for training deep learning architectures to perform classification. It consists in minimizing the smoothness of label signals on similarity graphs built at the output of the architecture. Equivalently, it can be seen as maximizing the distances between the network function images of training inputs from distinct classes. As such, only distances between pairs of examples in distinct classes are taken into account in the process, and the training does not prevent inputs from the same class to be mapped to distant locations in the output domain. We show that this loss leads to similar performance in classification as architectures trained using the classical cross-entropy, while offering interesting degrees of freedom and properties. We also demonstrate the interest of the proposed loss to increase robustness of trained architectures to deviations of the inputs.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.283
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

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
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207