Bibliographic record
Abstract
Out-of-distribution (OOD) detection approaches usually present special requirements (e.g., hyperparameter validation, collection of outlier data) and produce side effects (e.g., classification accuracy drop, slower energy-inefficient inferences). We argue that these issues are a consequence of the SoftMax loss anisotropy and disagreement with the maximum entropy principle. Thus, we propose the IsoMax loss and the entropic score. The seamless drop-in replacement of the SoftMax loss by IsoMax loss requires neither additional data collection nor hyperparameter validation. The trained models do not exhibit classification accuracy drop and produce fast energy-efficient inferences. Moreover, our experiments show that training neural networks with IsoMax loss significantly improves their OOD detection performance. The IsoMax loss exhibits state-of-the-art performance under the mentioned conditions (fast energy-efficient inference, no classification accuracy drop, no collection of outlier data, and no hyperparameter validation), which we call the seamless OOD detection task. In future work, current OOD detection methods may replace the SoftMax loss with the IsoMax loss to improve their performance on the commonly studied non-seamless OOD detection problem.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".