MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199348969 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v36i6.20567

Deconvolutional Density Network: Modeling Free-Form Conditional Distributions

2022· article· en· W3199348969 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bing Chen, Mazharul Islam, Jisuo Gao, Lin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of JinanNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDeconvolutionComputer scienceCurse of dimensionalityDiscretizationConditional probability distributionA priori and a posterioriAlgorithmArtificial neural networkDensity estimationArtificial intelligenceMultivariate statisticsMachine learningData miningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conditional density estimation (CDE) is the task of estimating the probability of an event conditioned on some inputs. A neural network (NN) can also be used to compute the output distribution for continuous-domain, which can be viewed as an extension of regression task. Nevertheless, it is difficult to explicitly approximate a distribution without knowing the information of its general form a priori. In order to fit an arbitrary conditional distribution, discretizing the continuous domain into bins is an effective strategy, as long as we have sufficiently narrow bins and very large data. However, collecting enough data is often hard to reach and falls far short of that ideal in many circumstances, especially in multivariate CDE for the curse of dimensionality. In this paper, we demonstrate the benefits of modeling free-form conditional distributions using a deconvolution-based neural net framework, coping with data deficiency problems in discretization. It has the advantage of being flexible but also takes advantage of the hierarchical smoothness offered by the deconvolution layers. We compare our method to a number of other density-estimation approaches and show that our Deconvolutional Density Network (DDN) outperforms the competing methods on many univariate and multivariate tasks. The code of DDN is available at https://github.com/NBICLAB/DDN

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207