MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949833607 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1307.0414

Challenges in Representation Learning: A report on three machine learning contests

2013· preprint· en· W2949833607 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Goodfellow, Dumitru Erhan, Pierre Carrier, Aaron Courville, Mehdi Mirza, Ben Hamner, Will Cukierski, Yichuan Tang, David S. Thaler, Dong‐Hyun Lee, Yingbo Zhou, Chetan Ramaiah, Fangxiang Feng, Ruifan Li, Xiaojie Wang, Dimitris Athanasakis, John Shawe‐Taylor, Maxim Milakov, John Park, Radu Tudor Ionescu, Marius Popescu, Cristian Grozea, James Bergstra, Jingjing Xie, Łukasz Romaszko, Bing Xu, Chuang Zhang, Yoshua Bengio

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2013
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceLearning to learnFeature learningActive learning (machine learning)Data scienceMachine learningMathematics educationPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ICML 2013 Workshop on Challenges in Representation Learning focused on three challenges: the black box learning challenge, the facial expression recognition challenge, and the multimodal learning challenge. We describe the datasets created for these challenges and summarize the results of the competitions. We provide suggestions for organizers of future challenges and some comments on what kind of knowledge can be gained from machine learning competitions.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0050.017
Research integrity0.0050.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.008

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.087 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations103
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207