Rapid Image Labeling via Neuro-Symbolic Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The success of Computer Vision (CV) relies heavily on manually annotated data. However, it is prohibitively expensive to annotate images in key domains such as healthcare, where data labeling requires significant domain expertise and cannot be easily delegated to crowd workers. To address this challenge, we propose a neuro-symbolic approach called RAPID, which infers image labeling rules from a small amount of labeled data provided by domain experts and automatically labels unannotated data using the rules. Specifically, RAPID combines pre-trained CV models and inductive logic learning to infer the logic-based labeling rules. RAPID achieves a labeling accuracy of 83.33% to 88.33% on four image labeling tasks with only 12 to 39 labeled samples. In particular, RAPID significantly outperforms finetuned CV models in two highly specialized tasks. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of RAPID in learning from small data and its capability to generalize among different tasks. Code and our dataset are publicly available at https://github.com/Neural-Symbolic-Image-Labeling/Rapid/
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".