Label noise learning with the combination of CausalNL and CGAN models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since Deep Neural Networks easily overfit label errors, which will degenerate the performance of Deep Learning algorithms, recent research gives a lot of methodology for this problem. A recent model, causalNL, uses a structural causalNL model for instance-dependent label-noise learning and obtained excellent experimental results. The implementation of the algorithm is based on the VAE model, which encodes latent variables Y and Z with the observable variables X and Y. This in turn generates the transfer matrix. But it relies on some unreasonable assumptions. In this paper, we introduce CGAN to the causalNL model, which avoids setting P(Y) and P(Z) for a specific distribution. GAN’s ability of processing data do not need to set a specific distribution. ICC was validated on several authoritative datasets and compared to a variety of proven algorithms including causalNL. The paper presents notable findings on the ICC model (Introduce CGAN to causalNL) shows excellent training ability on most datasets. Surprisingly, ICC shows totally higher accuracy than causalNL in CIFAR10.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".