Robust Label Propagation and Graph Embedding for Cross-Domain Image Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-domain label propagation (LP) faces two main challenges: 1) learning domain-invariant and 2) discriminative feature representations and obtaining high-confidence predicted labels. The distribution differences between domains can make labels difficult to propagate across domains. Low-quality labels can distort the modeling process associated with label-induced loss, resulting in decreased performance. We propose a novel cross-domain image classification method, namely, robust LP and graph embedding (RLPGE). We introduce a nuclear norm maximization constraint in order to make the predicted labels more diverse in categories while preserving their discriminability. The graph embedding process brings two nearby same-class samples close in the embedding subspace, ensuring domain invariance and local discriminability of the embedded features. For optimal graph learning, we simultaneously optimize the cross-domain graph and two intradomain graphs using both features and labels, enhancing their local discriminability and robustness to feature noise. We conducted comprehensive experiments on four cross-domain image classification datasets. The results demonstrate that our proposed RLPGE method outperforming some state-of-the-art approaches
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".