MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learning K-Nearest Neighbour Regression for Noisy Dataset with Application in Indoor Localization

2021· article· en· W4210269033 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRegressionIntuitionNoisy dataNoise (video)k-nearest neighbors algorithmData miningNearest neighbourMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many indoor location estimation algorithms compare the received signal strengths from WiFi access points to a prerecorded dataset, which may be composed of carefully mea-sured and curated data through a massive calibration campaign, and a large volume of crowd-sourced data captured by casual users. The crowd-sourced data usually contains valuable, but at the same time noisy, measurements where the noise might be in the features and/or the labels of data points. The treatment of such a dataset is challenging, as improper application of the dataset might result in inaccurate location estimation. In this paper, we propose a learning algorithm that makes the K-Nearest Neighbour (KNN) regression robust to noises both in features and labels of the training data. An intuition on why the learning algorithm should work is provided and the effectiveness of the algorithm is shown by experiments in a real environment.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.257 · 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