MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394198888 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21405104

A Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Space Framework for Functional Classification

2022· dataset· en· W4394198888 on OpenAlexaff
Peijun Sang, Adam B Kashlak, Linglong Kong

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproducing kernel Hilbert spaceKernel (algebra)Hilbert spaceMathematicsRepresenter theoremSpace (punctuation)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePure mathematicsKernel principal component analysisKernel methodSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intrinsic infinite-dimensional nature of functional data creates a bottleneck in the application of traditional classifiers to functional settings. These classifiers are generally either unable to generalize to infinite dimensions or have poor performance due to the curse of dimensionality. To address this concern, we propose building a distance-weighted discrimination (DWD) classifier on scores obtained by projecting data onto one specific direction. We choose this direction by minimizing, over a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, an empirical risk function containing the DWD classifier loss function. Our proposed classifier avoids overfitting and enjoys the appealing properties of DWD classifiers. We further extend this framework to accommodate functional data classification problems where scalar covariates are involved. In contrast to previous work, we establish a nonasymptotic estimation error bound on the relative misclassification rate. Through simulation studies and a real-world application, we demonstrate that the proposed classifier performs favorably relative to other commonly used functional classifiers in terms of prediction accuracy in finite-sample settings. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8690.001

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207