MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199268650 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2020.040104

Progressive Sampling-Based Joint Automatic Model Selection of Machine Learning and Feature Selection

2021· article· en· W3199268650 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sufen Chen, Xue-Qiang Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceFeature selectionHyperparameterModel selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Data pre-processingBayesian optimizationPreprocessorFeature (linguistics)Bayesian inferenceBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In most machine learning applications, selecting an appropriate machine learning model requires advanced knowledge and many labor-intensive manual iterations. As a result, automatic machine learning is particularly important in order to lower the threshold for machine learning. In addition, feature selection is a very important data preprocessing process. Selecting important features can alleviate the dimension disaster problem, and removing irrelevant features can reduce the difficulty of learning tasks. The existing automatic selection methods cannot perform the automatic selection of machine learning model and feature selection model simultaneously on large-scale data. Therefore, in order to adapt to the rapid development of the era of big data, this paper proposes to establish a unified hyperparameter space for machine learning and feature selection, and adopt Bayesian optimization model based on progressive sampling for automatic model selection. By extensive experiments, we show that our approach can significantly reduce search time and classification error rates compared to the most advanced automated model selection methods.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence PracticeSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207