MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206462905 · doi:10.1145/3487664.3487804

An Iterative Strategy for Deep Learning Classification on Spatial Data Streams

2021· article· en· W4206462905 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy Osborn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Stream Mining Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceTraining setPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkData stream miningDeep learningMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the classification of a static set of spatial objects has been well studied, the classification of spatial objects generated by a spatial data stream has not. In this paper, we propose an iterative deep learning strategy for spatial data stream classification. Using a deep neural network, our strategy iteratively performs training and testing of the classifier, with the goal of reaching a desired accuracy, and the same accuracy that would be achieved as a classifier that is trained and tested with the entire object set. An experimental evaluation of our strategy versus a fully trained classifier with varying training and testing splits shows that the higher the percentage of training objects, the better the accuracy, although the other splits do converge closer to the accuracy of the fully trained classifier.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Stream Mining TechniquesFrench-language works237,207