MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W37158840 · doi:10.1186/s12885-023-10891-6

Discriminatory Components for Pattern Classification.

2009· article· en· W37158840 on OpenAlexaff
Nick J. Pizzi, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Computer scienceUncorrelatedFuzzy logicFuzzy setBenchmark (surveying)Data miningMachine learningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pattern recognition literature is replete with the use of principal component analysis in the interpretation and analysis of data. However, in the specific case of classification, especially of biomedical patterns, this pre-processing method, which transforms possibly correlated features into a new set of uncorrelated variables, must be used with caution since a principal component, which may account for significant variance in the data, is not necessarily discriminatory. To compensate for this deficiency, we present a novel classification method using an adaptive network of fuzzy logic connectives to select the most discriminatory principal components. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of this method using a benchmark combination of a conventional classifier and principal component analysis.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology ConferenceSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207