MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323864040 · doi:10.1145/3587253

A Discriminant Information Theoretic Learning Framework for Multi-modal Feature Representation

2023· article· en· W4323864040 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Gao, Ling Guan

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Representation (politics)GeneralityModalFeature learningPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningDiscriminantCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionFacial recognition systemFeature extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As sensory and computing technology advances, multi-modal features have been playing a central role in ubiquitously representing patterns and phenomena for effective information analysis and recognition. As a result, multi-modal feature representation is becoming a progressively significant direction of academic research and real applications. Nevertheless, numerous challenges remain ahead, especially in the joint utilization of discriminatory representations and complementary representations from multi-modal features. In this article, a discriminant information theoretic learning (DITL) framework is proposed to address these challenges. By employing this proposed framework, the discrimination and complementation within the given multi-modal features are exploited jointly, resulting in a high-quality feature representation. According to characteristics of the DITL framework, the newly generated feature representation is further optimized, leading to lower computational complexity and improved system performance. To demonstrate the effectiveness and generality of DITL, we conducted experiments on several recognition examples, including both static cases, such as handwritten digit recognition, face recognition, and object recognition, and dynamic cases, such as video-based human emotion recognition and action recognition. The results show that the proposed framework outperforms state-of-the-art algorithms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and TechnologySame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207