Traditional classification algorithms typically assume that the labels of training samples are static and deterministic
ignoring the dynamic characteristics of sample labels that may change with conditions in real-world scenarios. In response to this issue
this paper proposes a new learning problem setting—the Extended Classification Problem
which simultaneously gives the class labels and label variability states of samples in the training data
which to characterize the class transition potential of samples under the influence of change mechanisms. Based on this setting
a multi-label learning framework was designed
an extension classification algorithm for label variability using support vector machine was constructed
to achieve collaborative optimization of category discrimination and label variability prediction. The experimental section validated the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm on both synthetic and real datasets. This paper provides a new modeling approach for label dynamic learning problems
which has good application prospects.
关键词
Keywords
references
YANG C Y, LI X S. Development and research progress of extenics over the past 40 years[J]. Journal of Guangdong University of Technology, 2023, 40(6): 1-11.
LI X S, LU L, XU L B. Research on knowledge graph model of shili based on comparative analysis of WSR methodology and extenics[J]. Business Review, 2021, 33(5): 152-162.
LI X S, ZHANG H L, ZHU Z X, et al . An intelligent transformation knowledge mining method based on extenics[J ] . Journal of Internet Technology, 2013, 14(2): 315-325.
GUO C, PLEISS G, SUN Y, et al . On calibration of modern neural networks[C ] // arXiv: 1706.04599(2017-06-14)[2025-06-10 ] . https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.04599.
BENGIO Y, LOURADOUR J, COLLOBERT R, et al . Curriculum learning[C ] //Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning. Montreal Quebec: ICML, 2009: 41-48.
KUMAR M P, PACKER B, KOLLER D. Self-paced learning for latent variable models[C] //Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Vancouver: NeurIPS, 2010.
TONEVA M, SORDONI A, TACHET DES COMBES R, et al . An empirical study of example forgetting during deep neural network learning[C ] //International Conference on Learning Representations. New Orleans: ICLR, 2019.
GOODFELLOW I J, SHLENS J, SZEGEDY C. Explaining and harnessing adversarial examples[C] //International Conference on Learning Representations. San Diego: ICLR, 2015.
MADRY A, MAKELOV A, SCHMIDT L, et al . Towards deep learning models resistant to adversarial attacks[C ] //International Conference on Learning Representations. Vancouver: ICLR, 2018.
RIBEIRO M T, SINGH S, GUESTRIN C. “Why should I trust you?”: Explaining the predictions of any classifier[C] //Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. San Francisco: KDD, 2016: 1135-1144.
LUNDBERG S M, LEE S I. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions[C] //Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. LongBeach: NeurIPS, 2017.
WACHTER S, MITTELSTADT B, RUSSELL C. Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR[J]. Harvard Journal of Law Technology, 2017, 31: 841.
MOTHILAL R K, SHARMA A, TAN C. Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations[C] //Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Online: FAccT 2020, 2020: 607-617.
ZHANG M L, ZHOU Z H. A review on multi-label learning algorithms[J]. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2014, 26(8): 1819-1837.