Dual-Stage OOD Detection Learning with an Unsupervised Start
Bibliographic record
Abstract
research-article Share on Dual-Stage OOD Detection Learning with an Unsupervised Start Authors: Jaturong Kongmanee University of Toronto, Canada University of Toronto, Canada 0009-0003-6153-7960View Profile , Thanyathorn Thanapattheerakul Innovative Cognitive Computing (IC2) Research Center School of Information Technology King Mongkut?s University of Technology Thonburi, Thailand Innovative Cognitive Computing (IC2) Research Center School of Information Technology King Mongkut?s University of Technology Thonburi, Thailand 0009-0004-6954-2243View Profile , Mark Chignell University of Toronto, Canada University of Toronto, Canada 0000-0001-8120-6905View Profile Authors Info & Claims IAIT '23: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Advances in Information TechnologyDecember 2023Article No.: 10Pages 1–7https://doi.org/10.1145/3628454.3628497Published:06 December 2023Publication History 0citation9DownloadsMetricsTotal Citations0Total Downloads9Last 12 Months9Last 6 weeks5 Get Citation AlertsNew Citation Alert added!This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.Manage my AlertsNew Citation Alert!Please log in to your account Save to BinderSave to BinderCreate a New BinderNameCancelCreateExport CitationPublisher SiteGet Access
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".