Data Augmentation using CA Evolved GANs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mining medical data images have great potential for exploring hidden patterns in the medical domain. Medical data are heterogeneous which involves images to a great extent like MRI, ECG or Stroke effects etc. Knowledge discovery from such data can improve the diagnostic technique. However, to make the machine learn from such datasets requires large data. In the low-data regime, machine learning algorithms work poorly. Data Augmentation alleviates this by using existing data more effectively, but standard data augmentation produces only limited alternative data. Recent developments in Deep Learning field is noteworthy when it comes to learning probability distribution of points through neural networks, and one of key part for such progress is because of Generative Adversarial Networks(GANs). In this paper, we propose an evolutionary training technique using a cultural algorithm(CA) for neuro-evolution of deep task oriented GANs to find the best architecture for the given dataset. This architecture will help in generating similar but completely new data images which can be further used for training diagnostic Neural Networks. We have compared our approach with the Genetic Algorithm(GA) based neuro-evolution of GANs and show that CA based neuro-evolution of GANs evolves architecture which can generate a higher number of stroke-face images with better resolution when there is low data of original stroke faces.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".