MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392934662 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i8.28743

Towards Diverse Perspective Learning with Selection over Multiple Temporal Poolings

2024· preprint· en· W4392934662 on OpenAlexaff
Jihyeon Seong, Jungmin Kim, Jaesik Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaKorea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Selection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Time Series Classification (TSC), temporal pooling methods that consider sequential information have been proposed. However, we found that each temporal pooling has a distinct mechanism, and can perform better or worse depending on time series data. We term this fixed pooling mechanism a single perspective of temporal poolings. In this paper, we propose a novel temporal pooling method with diverse perspective learning: Selection over Multiple Temporal Poolings (SoM-TP). SoM-TP dynamically selects the optimal temporal pooling among multiple methods for each data by attention. The dynamic pooling selection is motivated by the ensemble concept of Multiple Choice Learning (MCL), which selects the best among multiple outputs. The pooling selection by SoM-TP's attention enables a non-iterative pooling ensemble within a single classifier. Additionally, we define a perspective loss and Diverse Perspective Learning Network (DPLN). The loss works as a regularizer to reflect all the pooling perspectives from DPLN. Our perspective analysis using Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) reveals the limitation of a single perspective and ultimately demonstrates diverse perspective learning of SoM-TP. We also show that SoM-TP outperforms CNN models based on other temporal poolings and state-of-the-art models in TSC with extensive UCR/UEA repositories.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207