MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393178464 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i21.30447

Engineering the Neural Collapse Geometry of Supervised-Contrastive Loss (Student Abstract)

2024· article· en· W4393178464 on OpenAlexafffund
Jaidev Gill, Vala Vakilian, Christos Thrampoulidis

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKing Abdullah University of Science and TechnologyUniversities Space Research AssociationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeometryComputer scienceGeologyArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supervised-contrastive loss (SCL) is an alternative to cross-entropy (CE) for classification tasks that makes use of similarities in the embedding space to allow for richer representations. Previous works have used trainable prototypes to help improve test accuracy of SCL when training under imbalance. In this work, we propose the use of fixed prototypes to help engineering the feature geometry when training with SCL. We gain further insights by considering a limiting scenario where the number of prototypes far outnumber the original batch size. Through this, we establish a connection to CE loss with a fixed classifier and normalized embeddings. We validate our findings by conducting a series of experiments with deep neural networks on benchmark vision datasets.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207