MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Training and Testing Cascades for Imbalanced Data Classification

2022· article· en· W4318604573 on OpenAlex
Armin Sadreddin, Samira Sadaoui

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

Venue2022 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCascadeComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTraining setMachine learningData modelingData miningData setClass (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)Synthetic dataTest dataRecall ratePattern recognition (psychology)DatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although prediction models can provide high accuracy with massive data, learning from imbalanced data is a great challenge. Existing imbalanced-data solutions change the data distributions or the minority class's impact on the models by increasing the false positive rate to achieve a better recall. To overcome these issues, we develop an approach based on the cascade structure (a set of sequential learners). Our approach comprises training and testing cascades. The entire cascade is first trained on the actual data distribution by removing many negative data based on the probability thresholds and the desired class ratio. The obtained cascade is then used to predict unseen data. We validate our approach on two highly imbalanced datasets. The empirical results show our approach superiority when compared to existing solutions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.171 · 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