ProSeCo: Visual analysis of class separation measures and dataset characteristics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Class separation is an important concept in machine learning and visual analytics. We address the visual analysis of class separation measures for both high-dimensional data and its corresponding projections into 2D through dimensionality reduction (DR) methods. Although a plethora of separation measures have been proposed, it is difficult to compare class separation between multiple datasets with different characteristics, multiple separation measures, and multiple DR methods. We present ProSeCo, an interactive visualization approach to support comparison between up to 20 class separation measures and up to 4 DR methods, with respect to any of 7 dataset characteristics: dataset size, dataset dimensions, class counts, class size variability, class size skewness, outlieriness, and real-world vs. synthetically generated data. ProSeCo supports (1) comparing across measures, (2) comparing high-dimensional to dimensionally-reduced 2D data across measures, (3) comparing between different DR methods across measures, (4) partitioning with respect to a dataset characteristic, (5) comparing partitions for a selected characteristic across measures, and (6) inspecting individual datasets in detail. We demonstrate the utility of ProSeCo in two usage scenarios, using datasets [1] posted at https://osf.io/epcf9/.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it