MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400653413 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2024.6.012

An improved multi-stage framework for large-scale hierarchical text classification problems using a modified feature hashing and bi-filtering strategy

2024· article· en· W4400653413 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abubakar Ado, Abdulkadir Abubakar Bichi, Usman Haruna, Mohammed Amin Almaiah, Yahaya Garba Shawai, Rommel AlAli, Tayseer Alkhdour, Theyazn H. H. Aldhyani, Mahmaod Alrawad, Rami Shehab

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText and Document Classification Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHierarchyReduction (mathematics)Hash functionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceDimensionality reductionData miningFeature (linguistics)Multi-label classificationFeature hashingTask (project management)Scale (ratio)Machine learningHash tableMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classification of large-scale textual dataset is associated with a huge number of instances and millions of features which must be discriminated between large numbers of categories. The task requires the utilization of a defined hierarchy structure and tools that automatically classify instances within the hierarchy known as Large Scale Hierarchical Text Classification (LSHTC). Predicting the labels of instances by the employed classifiers is challenging due to the high number of features. Furthermore, the existing Dimensional Reduction (DR) approaches in cooperation with the LSHTC framework are still quite inefficient. In such a problem, an effective Hierarchical Dimensional Reduction approach can be advantageous in improving the performance of the LSHTC. Therefore, in this paper, we enhance the performance of LSHTC by proposing a Multi-stage Hierarchical Dimensional Reduction (MHDR) approach based on Modified Feature Hashing (MFH) and Hierarchical Bi-Filtering (HBF) method. In addition to alleviating bad collision and result discrepancy, experimental results show that the proposed approach has achieve the best performance in terms of micro-f1 and macro-f1 by recording average scores of 58.47% and 54.77% using TD-SVM, and average scores of 51.14% and 48.70% using TD-LR, respectively. The method also achieved 11% speed-up than the approaches compared.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicText and Document Classification TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207