MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416247092 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.19516

Probabilistic PCA on tensors

2025· preprint· W4416247092 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yaoming Zhen, Piotr Zwiernik

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMathematics
TopicTensor decomposition and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsIdentifiabilityMultilinear mapProbabilistic logicPrincipal component analysisEstimatorTensor (intrinsic definition)Kronecker deltaGaussianSparse PCAExpectation–maximization algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In probabilistic principal component analysis (PPCA), an observed vector is modeled as a linear transformation of a low-dimensional Gaussian factor plus isotropic noise. We generalize PPCA to tensors by constraining the loading operator to have Tucker structure, yielding a probabilistic multilinear PCA model that enables uncertainty quantification and naturally accommodates multiple, possibly heterogeneous, tensor observations. We develop the associated theory: we establish identifiability of the loadings and noise variance and show that-unlike in matrix PPCA-the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) exists even from a single tensor sample. We then study two estimators. First, we consider the MLE and propose an expectation maximization (EM) algorithm to compute it. Second, exploiting that Tucker maps correspond to rank-one elements after a Kronecker lifting, we design a computationally efficient estimator for which we provide provable finite-sample guarantees. Together, these results provide a coherent probabilistic framework and practical algorithms for learning from tensor-valued 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicTensor decomposition and applicationsFrench-language works237,207