Cited by 21Machine Learning and Data ClassificationRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationText and Document Classification Technologies

Post Classification Label Refinement Using Implicit Ordering Constraint Among Data Instances

Khandelwal, Ankush, Mithal, Varun, Kumar, Vipin·2015·2015 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining

Abstract

Classification of instances into different categories in various real world applications suffer from inaccuracies due to lack of representative training data, limitations of classification models, noise and outliers in the input data etc. In this paper we propose a new post classification label refinement method for the scenarios where data instances have an inherent ordering among them that can be leveraged to correct inconsistencies in class labels. We show that by using the ordering constraint, more robust algorithms can be developed than traditional methods. Moreover in most applications where this ordering among instances exists, it is not directly observed. The proposed approach simultaneously estimates the latent ordering among instances and corrects the class labels. We demonstrate the utility of the approach for the application of monitoring the dynamics of lakes and reservoirs. The proposed approach has been evaluated on synthetic datasets with different noise structures and noise levels.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icdm.2015.149

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khandelwal, A., Mithal, V., & Kumar, V.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Venue
2015 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-11
Pages
799-804
ISSN
1550-4786 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2245998324
Cited by
21
References
17
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.94
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • University of Minnesota
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
Keywords
label noise correction, label inconsistency, classification robustness, noisy training data

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review