MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997033417 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i04.5817

Robust Gradient-Based Markov Subsampling

2020· article· en· W2997033417 on OpenAlexafffund
Tieliang Gong, Quanhan Xi, Chen Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMinimaxEstimatorComputer scienceMarkov chainSampling (signal processing)Probabilistic logicAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subsampling is a widely used and effective method to deal with the challenges brought by big data. Most subsampling procedures are designed based on the importance sampling framework, where samples with high importance measures are given corresponding sampling probabilities. However, in the highly noisy case, these samples may cause an unstable estimator which could lead to a misleading result. To tackle this issue, we propose a gradient-based Markov subsampling (GMS) algorithm to achieve robust estimation. The core idea is to construct a subset which allows us to conservatively correct a crude initial estimate towards the true signal. Specifically, GMS selects samples with small gradients via a probabilistic procedure, constructing a subset that is likely to exclude noisy samples and provide a safe improvement over the initial estimate. We show that the GMS estimator is statistically consistent at a rate which matches the optimal in the minimax sense. The promising performance of GMS is supported by simulation studies and real data examples.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.125 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207