Regeneration Learning: A Learning Paradigm for Data Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine learning methods for conditional data generation usually build a mapping from source conditional data X to target data Y. The target Y (e.g., text, speech, music, image, video) is usually high-dimensional and complex, and contains information that does not exist in source data, which hinders effective and efficient learning on the source-target mapping. In this paper, we present a learning paradigm called regeneration learning for data generation, which first generates Y' (an abstraction/representation of Y) from X and then generates Y from Y'. During training, Y' is obtained from Y through either handcrafted rules or self-supervised learning and is used to learn X-->Y' and Y'-->Y. Regeneration learning extends the concept of representation learning to data generation tasks, and can be regarded as a counterpart of traditional representation learning, since 1) regeneration learning handles the abstraction (Y') of the target data Y for data generation while traditional representation learning handles the abstraction (X') of source data X for data understanding; 2) both the processes of Y'-->Y in regeneration learning and X-->X' in representation learning can be learned in a self-supervised way (e.g., pre-training); 3) both the mappings from X to Y' in regeneration learning and from X' to Y in representation learning are simpler than the direct mapping from X to Y. We show that regeneration learning can be a widely-used paradigm for data generation (e.g., text generation, speech recognition, speech synthesis, music composition, image generation, and video generation) and can provide valuable insights into developing data generation 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 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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".