Pseudo Oversampling Based on Feature Transformation and Fuzzy Membership Functions for Imbalanced and Overlapping Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Class imbalance in data poses challenges for classifier learning, drawing increased attention in data mining and machine learning. The occurrence of class overlap in real-world data exacerbates the learning difficulty. In this paper, a novel pseudo oversampling method (POM) is proposed to learn imbalanced and overlapping data. It is motivated by the point that overlapping samples from different classes share the same distribution space, and therefore information underlying in majority (negative) overlapping samples can be extracted and used to generate additional positive samples. A fuzzy logic-based membership function is defined to assess negative overlaps using both local and global information. Subsequently, the identified negative overlapping samples are shifted into the positive sample region by a transformation matrix, centered around the positive samples. POM outperforms 15 methods across 14 datasets, displaying superior performance in terms of metrics of <i>G<sub>m</sub></i>, <I>F</I><sub>1</sub> and <I>AUC</I>.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".