MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Closest Resemblance Classifier with Feature Interval Learning and Outranking Measures for Improved Performance

2024· preprint· en· W4400836543 on OpenAlexaff
Nabil Belacel

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverfittingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learningRandom forestSupport vector machineClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Robustness (evolution)Random subspace methodPairwise comparisonArtificial neural networkData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classifiers face a myriad of challenges in today’s data-driven world, ranging from overfitting and high computational costs to low accuracy, imbalanced training datasets, and the notorious black box effect. Furthermore, many traditional classifiers struggle with the robust handling of noisy and missing feature values. In response to these hurdles, we present classification methods that leverage the power of feature partitioning learning and outranking measures. Our classification algorithms offer an innovative approach, eliminating the need for prior domain knowledge by automatically discerning feature intervals directly from the data. These intervals capture essential patterns and characteristics within the dataset, empowering our classifiers with newfound adaptability and insight. In addition, we employ outranking measures to mitigate the influence of noise and uncertainty in the data. Through pairwise comparisons of alternatives on each feature, we enhance the robustness and reliability of our classification outcomes. The developed classifiers are empirically evaluated on several data sets from UCI repository and are compared with well-known classifiers including k Nearest Neighbors (K-NN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), Neural Network (NN), Naive Bayesian (NB) and Nearest Centroid (NC). The experiments result demonstrate that the classifiers based on feature interval learning and outranking approaches are robust to imbalanced data and to irrelevant features and achieve comparably and even better performances than the well-known classifiers in some cases. Moreover, our proposed classifiers produce more explainable models whilst preserving high predictive performance levels.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.004
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicImbalanced Data Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207