MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244663374 · doi:10.1109/grc.2007.4403181

Precision and Recall in Rough Support Vector Machines

2007· article· en· W4244663374 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

Venue2007 IEEE International Conference on Granular Computing (GRC 2007) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupport vector machineComputer scienceRecallArtificial intelligencePrecision and recallMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rough support vector machines (RSVMs) supplement conventional support vector machines (SVMs) by providing a better representation of the boundary region. Increasing interest has been paid to the theoretical development of RSVMs, which has already lead to a modification of existing SVM implementations as RSVMs. This paper shows how to extend the use of precision and recall from a SVM implementation to a RSVM implementation. Our approach is demonstrated in practice with the help of Gist, a popular SVM implementation.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.260 · 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