MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952144181 · doi:10.1145/3292500.3330962

Tackle Balancing Constraint for Incremental Semi-Supervised Support Vector Learning

2019· article· en· W2952144181 on OpenAlexaff
Shuyang Yu, Bin Gu, Kun-Peng Ning, Haiyan Chen, Jian Pei, Heng Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)Computer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Support vector machineConvergence (economics)Incremental learningSemi-supervised learningGeneralizationReduction (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semi-Supervised Support Vector Machine (S3VM) is one of the most popular methods for semi-supervised learning. To avoid the trivial solution of classifying all the unlabeled examples to a same class, balancing constraint is often used with S3VM (denoted as BCS3VM). Recently, a novel incremental learning algorithm (IL-S3VM) based on the path following technique was proposed to significantly scale up S3VM. However, the dynamic relationship of balancing constraint with previous labeled and unlabeled samples impede their incremental method for handling BCS3VM. To fill this gap, in this paper, we propose a new incremental S3VM algorithm (IL-BCS3VM) based on IL-S3VM which can effectively handle the balancing constraint and directly update the solution of BCS3VM. Specifically, to handle the dynamic relationship of balancing constraint with previous labeled and unlabeled samples, we design two unique procedures which can respectively eliminate and add the balancing constraint into S3VM. More importantly, we provide the finite convergence analysis for our IL-BCS3VM algorithm. Experimental results on a variety of benchmark datasets not only confirm the finite convergence of IL-BCS3VM, but also show a huge reduction of computational time compared with existing batch and incremental learning algorithms, while retaining the similar generalization performance.

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)0.007
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207