MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006969417 · doi:10.1051/ps/2020018

Universal consistency of the <i>k</i>-NN rule in metric spaces and Nagata dimension

2020· article· en· W3006969417 on OpenAlexaff
Benoı̂t Collins, Sushma Kumari, Vladimir Pestov

Bibliographic record

VenueESAIM Probability and Statistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topology and Set Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceJapan International Cooperation AgencyConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsEuclidean spaceMathematicsEuclidean distanceMetric spaceEuclidean geometryGeneralizationConsistency (knowledge bases)Dimension (graph theory)Pure mathematicsMetric (unit)Discrete mathematicsArgument (complex analysis)Space (punctuation)Computer scienceMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The k nearest neighbour learning rule (under the uniform distance tie breaking) is universally consistent in every metric space X that is sigma-finite dimensional in the sense of Nagata. This was pointed out by Cérou and Guyader (2006) as a consequence of the main result by those authors, combined with a theorem in real analysis sketched by D. Preiss (1971) (and elaborated in detail by Assouad and Quentin de Gromard (2006)). We show that it is possible to give a direct proof along the same lines as the original theorem of Charles J. Stone (1977) about the universal consistency of the k-NN classifier in the finite dimensional Euclidean space. The generalization is non-trivial because of the distance ties being more prevalent in the non-Euclidean setting, and on the way we investigate the relevant geometric properties of the metrics and the limitations of the Stone argument, by constructing various 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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESAIM Probability and StatisticsSame topicAdvanced Topology and Set TheoryFrench-language works237,207