Targeted Self Supervision for Classification on a Small COVID-19 CT Scan Dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Traditionally, convolutional neural networks need large amounts of data labelled by humans to train. Self supervision has been proposed as a method of dealing with small amounts of labelled data. The aim of this study is to determine whether self supervision can increase classification performance on a small COVID-19 CT scan dataset. This study also aims to determine whether the proposed self supervision strategy, targeted self supervision, is a viable option for a COVID-19 imaging dataset. A total of 10 experiments are run comparing the classification performance of the proposed method of self supervision with different amounts of data. The experiments run with the proposed self supervision strategy perform significantly better than their non-self supervised counterparts. We get almost 8% increase in accuracy with full self supervision when compared to no self supervision. The results suggest that self supervision can improve classification performance on a small COVID-19 CT scan dataset. Code for targeted self supervision can be found at this link: <a href="https://github.com/Mewtwo/Targeted-Self-Supervision/tree/main/COVID-CT" target="_blank">this https URL</a> </p>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".