MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Moore-Penrose Inverse Network with Refinement Strategy for One-class Classification

2023· article· en· W4391307972 on OpenAlexaff
Junna Gao, Dehui Kong, Baocai Yin, Weisi Lin, Wandong Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)InverseOutlierMoore–Penrose pseudoinverseArtificial intelligenceCoding (social sciences)ResidualPattern recognition (psychology)Class (philosophy)AlgorithmColor-codingMean squared errorFeature (linguistics)Data miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multilayer least-square (LS)-based one-class classification networks (MLS-OCNs) have gained great attention for the purpose of identifying anomalies and outliers. However, many MLS-OCNs encounter the issue of loosely connected feature coding because they use two separate mechanisms for feature encoding and final pattern recognition. This paper proposes a solution to this problem by introducing a multilayer algorithm called deep Moore-Penrose inverse network with refinement (DMPINR). In particular, DMPINR employs an end-to-end learning process based on the Moore-Penrose inverse (MPI) to identify optimal latent space and classify objects simultaneously. To enhance the robustness of representations, the DMPINR technique pulls back the residual error from the output layer to the hidden layers sequentially, recalculating the parameters of these hidden layers using MPI. The experimental results on ten popular OCC datasets demonstrate that the proposed approach outperforms many existing MLS-OCNs in G-Mean and F1scores.

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)0.002
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 score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207