MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389569092 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3692500/v1

Meta Generative Image and Text Data Augmentation Optimization

2023· preprint· en· W4389569092 on OpenAlexafffund
Enzhi Zhang, Bochen Dong, Mohamed Wahib, Rui Zhong, Masaharu Munetomo

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersHokkaido UniversityCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsGenerative grammarImage (mathematics)Computer scienceGenerative modelArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<title>Abstract</title> This paper proposes a method called Meta Generative Data Augmentation Optimization (MGDAO) to overcome limited types of operations for the policy-based automatic data augmentation method. While traditional data augmentation methods have relied on expert intuition to determine effective transformations, recent approaches have attempted to generate data augmentation strategies automatically. However, these automatic methods can still suffer from limited operation sets and difficulty training conditional generative models. To address these issues, MGDAO replaces the limited operations space in the AutoAugment series with a deep-style generator and replaces the discriminator in a generative adversarial model with the validation loss of the target model. These replacements released fixed image operations and made MGDAO useful for sequential data. The generator learns to transform the data from the training domain to the validation data domain. It is further used to generate augmented samples to train the target model and reduce the validation loss. Experiments on classification benchmarks of few-shot image and text-based datasets show that MGDAO achieves competitive results compared to data auto-augmentation methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.133 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207