Investigating the Performance of Naive- Bayes Classifiers and K- Nearest Neighbor Classifiers
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
Probability theory is the framework for making decision under uncertainty. In classification, Bayes' rule is used to calculate the probabilities of the classes and it is a big issue how to classify raw data rationally to minimize expected risk. Bayesian theory can roughly be boiled down to one principle: to see the future, one must look at the past. Naive Bayes classifier is one of the mostly used practical Bayesian learning methods. K-nearest neighbor is a supervised learning algorithm where the result of new instance query is classified based on majority of k-nearest neighbor category. The classifiers do not use any model to fit and only based on memory/training data. In this paper, after reviewing Bayesian theory, the naive Bayes classifier and k-nearest neighbor classifier is implemented and applied to a dataset "credit card approval" application. Eventually the performance of these two classifiers is observed on this application in terms of the correct classification and misclassification and how the performance of k-nearest neighbor classifier can be improved by varying the value of k.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it