MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W83133245

Thresholding for making classifiers cost-sensitive

2006· article· en· W83133245 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBalanced histogram thresholdingPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningSensitivity (control systems)HistogramImage (mathematics)Engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose a very simple, yet general and effective method to make any cost-insensitive classifiers (that can produce probability estimates) cost-sensitive. The method, called Thresholding, selects a proper threshold from training instances according to the misclassification cost. Similar to other cost-sensitive meta-learning methods, Thresholding can convert any existing (and future) costinsensitive learning algorithms and techniques into costsensitive ones. However, by comparing with the existing cost sensitive meta-learning methods and the direct use of the theoretical threshold, Thresholding almost always produces the lowest misclassification cost. Experiments also show that Thresholding has the least sensitivity on the misclassification cost ratio. Thus, it is recommended to use when the difference on misclassification costs is large.

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.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.193 · 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