MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168725586 · doi:10.1142/s0218001421510113

Case-Base Maintenance: An Approach Based on Active Semi-Supervised Learning

2021· article· en· W3168725586 on OpenAlexaff
Asma Chebli, Akila Djebbar, Hayet Farida Merouani, Hakim Lounis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottleneckComputer scienceMachine learningRepresentativeness heuristicArtificial intelligenceBenchmark (surveying)Set (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)Knowledge baseBase (topology)Case-based reasoningSemi-supervised learningData miningSelection (genetic algorithm)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Case-Base Maintenance (CBM) becomes of great importance when implementing a Computer-Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system using Case-Based Reasoning (CBR). Since it is essential for the learning to avoid the case-base degradation, this work aims to build and maintain a quality case base while overcoming the difficulty of assembling labeled case bases, traditionally assumed to exist or determined by human experts. The proposed approach takes advantage of large volumes of unlabeled data to select valuable cases to add to the case base while monitoring retention to avoid performance degradation and to build a compact quality case base. We use machine learning techniques to cope with this challenge: an Active Semi-Supervised Learning approach is proposed to overcome the bottleneck of scarcity of labeled data. In order to acquire a quality case base, we target its performance criterion. Case selection and retention are assessed according to three combined sampling criteria: informativeness, representativeness, and diversity. We support our approach with empirical evaluations using different benchmark data sets. Based on experimentation, the proposed approach achieves good classification accuracy with a small number of retained cases, using a small training set as a case base.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial IntelligenceSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207