Recurrent Dirichlet Belief Networks for interpretable Dynamic Relational Data Modelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Dirichlet Belief Network~(DirBN) has been recently proposed as a promising approach in learning interpretable deep latent representations for objects. In this work, we leverage its interpretable modelling architecture and propose a deep dynamic probabilistic framework -- the Recurrent Dirichlet Belief Network~(Recurrent-DBN) -- to study interpretable hidden structures from dynamic relational data. The proposed Recurrent-DBN has the following merits: (1) it infers interpretable and organised hierarchical latent structures for objects within and across time steps; (2) it enables recurrent long-term temporal dependence modelling, which outperforms the one-order Markov descriptions in most of the dynamic probabilistic frameworks; (3) the computational cost scales to the number of positive links only. In addition, we develop a new inference strategy, which first upward-and-backward propagates latent counts and then downward-and-forward samples variables, to enable efficient Gibbs sampling for the Recurrent-DBN. We apply the Recurrent-DBN to dynamic relational data problems. The extensive experiment results on real-world data validate the advantages of the Recurrent-DBN over the state-of-the-art models in interpretable latent structure discovery and improved link prediction 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".