MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ICA-Proto: Iterative Cross Alignment Prototypical Network for Incremental Few-Shot Relation Classification

2023· article· en· W4386576747 on OpenAlexaff
Wangjie Jiang, Zhihao Ye, Bang Liu, Ruihui Zhao, Jianguang Zheng, Mengyao Li, Zhiyong Li, Yujiu Yang, Yefeng Zheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)EmbeddingRelation (database)Representation (politics)Artificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Iterative and incremental developmentEncoding (memory)Feature vectorMachine learningFeature learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the task of incremental few-shot relation classification, model performance is always limited by the incompatibility between the base feature embedding space and the novel feature embedding space. To tackle the issue, we propose a novel model named ICA-Proto: Iterative Cross Alignment prototypical network. Specifically, we incorporate the query representation into the encoding of novel prototypes and utilize the query-aware prototypes to update the query representation at the same time. Further, we implement the above process iteratively to achieve more interaction. In addition, a novel prototype quadruplet loss is designed to regulate the spatial distributions of embedding space, so as to make it easier for the relation classification. Experimental results on two benchmark datasets demonstrate that ICA-Proto significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art baseline model.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207