MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166436955 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.01642

Projection-free Graph-based Classifier Learning using Gershgorin Disc Perfect Alignment

2021· preprint· en· W3166436955 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng Yang, Gene Cheung, Guangtao Zhai

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaplacian matrixCombinatoricsSpectral graph theoryMathematicsLaplace operatorTime complexityBinary numberDiscrete mathematicsAlgorithmGraphLine graphMathematical analysisVoltage graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In semi-supervised graph-based binary classifier learning, a subset of known labels $\hat{x}_i$ are used to infer unknown labels, assuming that the label signal $\mathbf{x}$ is smooth with respect to a similarity graph specified by a Laplacian matrix. When restricting labels $x_i$ to binary values, the problem is NP-hard. While a conventional semi-definite programming relaxation (SDR) can be solved in polynomial time using, for example, the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM), the complexity of projecting a candidate matrix $\mathbf{M}$ onto the positive semi-definite (PSD) cone ($\mathbf{M} \succeq 0$) per iteration remains high. In this paper, leveraging a recent linear algebraic theory called Gershgorin disc perfect alignment (GDPA), we propose a fast projection-free method by solving a sequence of linear programs (LP) instead. Specifically, we first recast the SDR to its dual, where a feasible solution $\mathbf{H} \succeq 0$ is interpreted as a Laplacian matrix corresponding to a balanced signed graph minus the last node. To achieve graph balance, we split the last node into two, each retains the original positive / negative edges, resulting in a new Laplacian $\bar{\mathbf{H}}$. We repose the SDR dual for solution $\bar{\mathbf{H}}$, then replace the PSD cone constraint $\bar{\mathbf{H}} \succeq 0$ with linear constraints derived from GDPA -- sufficient conditions to ensure $\bar{\mathbf{H}}$ is PSD -- so that the optimization becomes an LP per iteration. Finally, we extract predicted labels from converged solution $\bar{\mathbf{H}}$. Experiments show that our algorithm enjoyed a $28\times$ speedup over the next fastest scheme while achieving comparable label prediction performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.104 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207