Asynchronous Active Learning with Distributed Label Querying
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
Active learning tries to learn an effective model with lowest labeling cost. Most existing active learning methods work in a synchronous way, which implies that the label querying can be performed only after the model updating in each iteration. While training models is usually time-consuming, it may lead to serious latency between two queries, especially in the crowdsourcing environments where there are many online annotators working simultaneously. This will significantly decrease the labeling efficiency and strongly limit the application of active learning in real tasks. To overcome this challenge, we propose a multi-server multi-worker framework for asynchronous active learning in the distributed environment. By maintaining two shared pools of candidate queries and labeled data respectively, the servers, the workers and the annotators efficiently corporate with each other without synchronization. Moreover, diverse sampling strategies from distributed workers are incorporated to select the most useful instances for model improving. Both theoretical analysis and experimental study validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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