Hierarchical Multi-Label Classification with Missing Information for Benthic Habitat Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we apply state-of-the-art self-supervised learning techniques on a large dataset of seafloor imagery, BenthicNet, and study their performance for a complex hierarchical multi-label (HML) classification downstream task. In particular, we demonstrate the capacity to conduct HML training in scenarios where there exist multiple levels of missing annotation information, an important scenario for handling heterogeneous real-world data collected by multiple research groups with differing data collection protocols. We find that, when using smaller one-hot image label datasets typical of local or regional scale benthic science projects, models pre-trained with self-supervision on a larger collection of in-domain benthic data outperform models pre-trained on ImageNet. In the HML setting, we find the model can attain a deeper and more precise classification if it is pre-trained with self-supervision on indomain data. We hope this work can establish a benchmark for future models in the field of automated underwater image annotation tasks and can guide work in other domains with hierarchical annotations of mixed resolution.1
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".