MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405908075 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2024.3524180

Efficient Signed Graph Sampling via Balancing & Gershgorin Disc Perfect Alignment

2024· article· en· W4405908075 on OpenAlexafffund
Chinthaka Dinesh, Gene Cheung, Saghar Bagheri, Ivan V. Bajić

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityYork UniversityCollege of Veterinarians of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGraphGraph theoryAlgorithmComputer visionCombinatoricsPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A basic premise in graph signal processing (GSP) is that a graph encoding pairwise (anti-)correlations of the targeted signal as edge weights is leveraged for graph filtering. Existing fast graph sampling schemes are designed and tested only for positive graphs describing positive correlations. However, there are many real-world datasets exhibiting strong anti-correlations, and thus a suitable model is a signed graph, containing both positive and negative edge weights. In this paper, we propose the first linear-time method for sampling signed graphs, centered on the concept of balanced signed graphs. Specifically, given an empirical covariance data matrix , we first learn a sparse inverse matrix , interpreted as a graph Laplacian corresponding to a signed graph . We approximate with a balanced signed graph via fast edge weight augmentation in linear time, where the eigenpairs of Laplacian for are graph frequencies. Next, we select a node subset for sampling to minimize the error of the signal interpolated from samples in two steps. We first align all Gershgorin disc left-ends of Laplacian at the smallest eigenvalue via similarity transform , leveraging a recent linear algebra theorem called Gershgorin disc perfect alignment (GDPA). We then perform sampling on using a previous fast Gershgorin disc alignment sampling (GDAS) scheme. Experiments show that our signed graph sampling method outperformed fast sampling schemes designed for positive graphs on various datasets with anti-correlations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207