MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092636093 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2010.03172

Improving Sequential Latent Variable Models with Autoregressive Flows

2020· preprint· en· W3092636093 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Marino, Lei Chen, Jiawei He, Stephan Mandt

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive modelSTAR modelComputer scienceLatent variableGeneralizationBenchmark (surveying)DecorrelationSequence (biology)Latent variable modelNonlinear autoregressive exogenous modelFlow (mathematics)AlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEconometricsMachine learningTime seriesAutoregressive integrated moving average

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose an approach for improving sequence modeling based on autoregressive normalizing flows. Each autoregressive transform, acting across time, serves as a moving frame of reference, removing temporal correlations, and simplifying the modeling of higher-level dynamics. This technique provides a simple, general-purpose method for improving sequence modeling, with connections to existing and classical techniques. We demonstrate the proposed approach both with standalone flow-based models and as a component within sequential latent variable models. Results are presented on three benchmark video datasets, where autoregressive flow-based dynamics improve log-likelihood performance over baseline models. Finally, we illustrate the decorrelation and improved generalization properties of using flow-based dynamics.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.090 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207