Enhancing Supervised Visualization Through Autoencoder and Random Forest Proximities for Out-of-Sample Extension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The value of supervised dimensionality reduction lies in its ability to uncover meaningful connections between data features and labels. Common dimensionality reduction methods embed a set of fixed, latent points, but are not capable of generalizing to an unseen test set. In this paper, we provide an out-of-sample extension method for the random forest-based supervised dimensionality reduction method, RF-PHATE, combining information learned from the random forest model with the function-learning capabilities of autoencoders. Through quantitative assessment of various autoencoder architectures, we identify that networks that reconstruct random forest proximities are more robust for the embedding extension problem. Furthermore, by leveraging proximity-based prototypes, we achieve a 40% reduction in training time without compromising extension quality. Our method does not require label information for out-of-sample points, thus serving as a semi-supervised method, and can achieve consistent quality using only 10% of the training data.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".