MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210405460 · doi:10.1145/3483448

Feature Extraction of High-dimensional Data Based on J-HOSVD for Cyber-Physical-Social Systems

2022· article· en· W4210405460 on OpenAlexaff
Yuan Gao, Laurence T. Yang, Yaliang Zhao, Jing Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicTensor decomposition and applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature extractionRobustness (evolution)Data miningDimensionality reductionArtificial intelligenceBig dataPattern recognition (psychology)Benchmark (surveying)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the further integration of Cyber-Physical-Social systems (CPSSs), there is explosive growth of the data in CPSSs. How to discover effective information or knowledge from CPSSs big data and provide support for subsequent learning tasks has become a core issue. Moreover, modern applications in CPSSs increasingly rely on the processing and analysis of high-dimensional data; the correlation and internal structure of these high-dimensional data are gradually becoming more complex, which further makes traditional machine learning algorithms a little inadequate in processing these data. In this article, we propose two general dimension reduction and feature extraction methods for high-dimensional data based on joint tensor decomposition, namely core feature extraction methods and factor feature extraction methods, which can effectively mine out the common components and hidden patterns of high-dimensional data by joint analysis while maintaining the original data structure. We also verified the effectiveness of the methods from both theoretical and practical aspects. Furthermore, we extend the two feature extraction methods to the tensor distance scenario and illustrate that the compressed features extracted by our models can keep the global information of original data well. Finally, we evaluated proposed methods on two benchmark datasets through classification tasks, and experimental results show that the low-dimensional features extracted by the proposed models have higher classification accuracy than the direct classification of the original data, which further verifies the effectiveness and robustness of our 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Management Information SystemsSame topicTensor decomposition and applicationsFrench-language works237,207