Enhancing Fitness Evaluation in Genetic Algorithm-Based Architecture Search for AI-Aided Financial Regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AI-aided Financial Regulation (AIFR) is a practical and significant task, but current solutions have yet to be optimized with customized model designs. Given the privacy concerns surrounding financial data, we aim to employ Neural Architecture Search (NAS) to help non-expert end-users automatically design architectures. The genetic algorithm-based NAS stands out due to its relatively low hardware requirements and robust theoretical foundation. However, constrained by limited data, the model would undergo architecture search on a general regulatory dataset while being deployed on private one owned by each organization. The data distribution of the private dataset may vary from that of public datasets, giving rise to the challenge of data domain shift. To alleviate this problem, we propose a novel fitness evaluation method. When scoring the fitness, we take into account both the architecture’s validation accuracy and its potential for generalization by the metric of loss landscape. In addition, we improve the training paradigm for evaluation, utilizing a prototype-based training paradigm based on embedding distances for classification, allowing for rapid domain adaptation and improve performance on the distribution-shift data. We further introduce GA-TextCNN, a GA-based NAS framework specifically designed for text recognition, enhancing its suitability for text data within AIFR tasks. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, we collect two related datasets and evaluate our method on it. The extensive experiments demonstrate that our method significantly improves baseline models and is effective in solving the AIFR problem.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".