MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139051417 · doi:10.1111/exsy.12688

Multivariate‐bounded Gaussian mixture model with minimum message length criterion for model selection

2021· article· en· W3139051417 on OpenAlexafffund
Muhammad Azam, Nizar Bouguila

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMNIST databaseCluster analysisModel selectionMixture modelSelection (genetic algorithm)Artificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature selectionBounded functionData miningGaussianMachine learningArtificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bounded support Gaussian mixture model (BGMM) has been proposed for data modelling as an alternative to unbounded support mixture models for the cases when the data lies in bounded support. In this paper, we propose applications of multivariate BGMM in data clustering for more insightful analysis of the model. We also propose minimum message length (MML) criterion for model selection in data clustering using multivariate BGMM. The presented model is applied to data clustering in several speech (TSP and Spoken Digits) and image databases (MNIST and Fashion MNIST). We also propose the application of BGMM in code‐book generation at feature extraction phase. Inspired by the success of bag of visual words approach in computer vision, it is also introduced in speech data representation and validated through experiments presented in this paper. For validation of model selection criterion, MML is applied to different medical, speech and image datasets. Experimental results obtained during the model selection through MML are further compared with seven different model selection criteria. The results presented in the paper demonstrate the effectiveness of BGMM for clustering speech and image databases, code‐book generation through clustering for feature representation and model selection.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert SystemsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207