MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382467791 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v37i7.26012

The Effect of Diversity in Meta-Learning

2023· article· en· W4382467791 on OpenAlexaff
Ramnath Kumar, Tristan Deleu, Yoshua Bengio

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Diversity (politics)Computer scienceDistribution (mathematics)Cognitive psychologyEmpirical evidenceMachine learningArtificial intelligencePsychologyMathematicsEpistemologyEngineeringSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies show that task distribution plays a vital role in the meta-learner's performance. Conventional wisdom is that task diversity should improve the performance of meta-learning. In this work, we find evidence to the contrary; (i) our experiments draw into question the efficacy of our learned models: similar manifolds can be learned with a subset of the data (lower task diversity). This finding questions the advantage of providing more data to the model, and (ii) adding diversity to the task distribution (higher task diversity) sometimes hinders the model and does not lead to a significant improvement in performance as previously believed. To strengthen our findings, we provide both empirical and theoretical evidence.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.105
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.105
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207