Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 10 cited by

Enhancing Few-Shot Learning with Integrated Data and GAN Model Approaches

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The MhERGAN algorithm claims to improve few-shot classification by correcting GAN bias on both the generator and discriminator sides, then fine-tuning with MHLoss.

desk verdict A combination of known GAN/MCMC/ensemble tricks for few-shot learning whose core acceptance-ratio equation is unjustified and whose empirical comparisons are missing the claimed baselines. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16567 v1 pith:4YFQRBXJ submitted 2024-11-25 cs.LG

Yinqiu Feng , Aoran Shen , Jiacheng Hu , Yingbin Liang , Shiru Wang , Junliang Du This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LG
keywords few-shotlearningGANMCMCsamplingdiscriminatorensembleMHLossdataaugmentationmodelfine-tuningsmall-sample
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a generative adversarial network can be made useful for few-shot learning if both of its components are bias-corrected: the discriminator through ensemble averaging and the generator through Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling that targets the discriminator's learned distribution. The resulting algorithm, MhERGAN, is reported to produce augmented data that improves classifier accuracy, precision, and F1 over hGAN on most of the tested small datasets, as well as over SMOTE and ROS. The practical motivation is that few-shot settings such as drug discovery, medical records, and malicious traffic detection cannot rely on large labeled datasets, so a method that generates relevant training data from tiny samples would make machine learning usable where data is scarce. The paper also claims that adding MHLoss fine-tuning stabilizes and accelerates convergence.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the reparameterized GAN ensemble, which combines an ensemble discriminator $D(x)=\mathrm{Com}(D_1(x),\dots,D_T(x))$ with $T=5$ Bagging sub-discriminators combined by softmax, a calibration step, and a latent-space MCMC sampler whose proposal is generated by Langevin dynamics and accepted or rejected by Metropolis-Hastings. The target distribution for this sampler is the calibrated discriminator's implicit distribution $p_d$, and the generator maps the accepted latent samples to data samples $x'=G(z')$ to form the corrected dataset. On the fine-tuning side, MHLoss sums losses over multiple classifier heads to speed convergence, and the paper increases iteration rounds for extra stability.

What would settle it

Run MhERGAN and a plain GAN on the same 2-way 30-shot task and compare the corrected generator's output samples with held-out true samples using a distribution distance such as the Wasserstein distance; if the corrected samples are not closer to the true distribution than the uncorrected generator's samples, the discriminator-target MCMC correction fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is that bias in few-shot GANs can be corrected from both sides. The discriminator is ensembled with Bagging and then calibrated, giving a more stable target distribution; the generator is corrected by running MCMC in latent space with Langevin proposals and Metropolis-Hastings acceptance, using the calibrated discriminator's implicit distribution as the target. The corrected generator produces a 'relevant dataset' used to pre-train a classifier, which is then fine-tuned with more iterations and MHLoss. Experiments on CIFAR-10 and five tabular datasets show Inception Score rising with each correction, and MhERGAN outperforming hGAN on most 2-way 30-shot and 2-way 2m-shot few-shot tasks.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that on very small samples the discriminator learns a distribution closer to the true data than the generator does, so steering the generator toward the discriminator is a correction rather than a new error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On small tabular benchmarks, MhERGAN-augmented data improves classification accuracy, precision, and F1 over hGAN on most of the five datasets tested.
  • Combining MCMC generator correction and discriminator ensembling raises Inception Score more than either correction alone, so the two bias corrections are complementary.
  • The method is intended to transfer to data-scarce application domains such as drug discovery, medical records, and malicious traffic detection, where acquiring large labeled datasets is impractical.
  • Increasing fine-tuning iterations together with MHLoss provides stability and faster convergence, so the final classifier can benefit from more training rounds without the usual diminishing returns.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same correction recipe could apply to other generative models, such as diffusion models, whenever a cheaper critic is more reliable than the generator on tiny samples.
  • The paper's premise that discrimination is easier than generation implies a testable ordering: on the same few-shot task, the calibrated discriminator's density estimate should be closer to the true distribution than the generator's; if this fails, the MCMC correction direction should be reconsidered.
  • The design implies that bias correction of the data generator matters more than raw sample count, so even modest augmentation can help if the target distribution is accurate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MhERGAN, a few-shot learning framework that combines a reparameterized GAN ensemble with MCMC sampling to correct generator bias and MHLoss-based fine-tuning to improve classifier stability. The architecture is an extension of the authors' earlier DAMFT_FSL framework. Experiments on CIFAR-10 report Inception Scores for the GAN variants, and experiments on five tabular datasets report accuracy, precision, and F1 for 2-way 30-shot and 2-way 2m-shot classification tasks, comparing MhERGAN against an hGAN baseline. The abstract and conclusion claim that MhERGAN is 'highly effective' and superior to SMOTE and ROS, although those baseline results do not appear in the tables.

Significance. If the claims were supported, the paper would offer a practical method for augmenting very small training sets with GAN-generated data, with potential application to domains where labeled data are scarce. The paper also makes a concrete algorithmic proposal and provides a reproducible experimental protocol for five datasets. However, the significance is currently undermined by the lack of statistical rigor, the absence of the promised SMOTE and ROS comparisons, and the unresolved validity of the core MCMC correction step. The work does not ship code, machine-checked proofs, or parameter-free derivations, so its value rests entirely on the empirical evidence, which is currently too weak to establish the central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [III-A-4, Eq. (6)] The Metropolis-Hastings acceptance probability in Eq. (6) is not a valid MH ratio for the target distribution described in the text. The proposal is generated in latent space via Langevin dynamics and then mapped to sample space through the generator G, while the target is said to be the distribution implied by the calibrated discriminator. A correct MH ratio in sample space requires the proposal density in sample space, which includes the Jacobian of G, and a conversion of the discriminator output into an unnormalized density (for example, via the density-ratio identity D/(1-D) * p_g). Equation (6) contains neither term. This is load-bearing because the entire generator-bias-correction mechanism depends on this sampling step; as written, the sampler cannot be certified to target the intended distribution.
  2. [IV.C] The paper claims that 'compared to the SMOTE algorithm, the MhERGAN algorithm has higher average values for the three metrics' and that 'the MhERGAN algorithm outperforms the ROS algorithm and the SMOTE algorithm on most datasets.' These claims are unsupported because Tables 2 and 3 report only hGAN and MhERGAN columns; no SMOTE or ROS results are shown anywhere in the manuscript. The claims must either be removed or the corresponding baseline results must be added and compared.
  3. [IV.C, Tables 2 and 3] The reported improvements of MhERGAN over hGAN are very small in absolute terms (for example, accuracy gains of 0.011 to 0.016 on most datasets, and smaller on others), and the paper provides no error bars, confidence intervals, standard deviations, or significance tests. With only point estimates, the observed differences could easily be within random variation. The paper should report multiple runs with seeds and appropriate statistical comparisons before claiming effectiveness.
  4. [III-A-3 and III-A-4] The method relies on the assumption that the discriminator's implicit distribution is closer to the true data distribution than the generator's, and that the calibration in Eq. (4) makes the discriminator distribution 'closer to the true distribution.' No formal argument or empirical evidence is provided for either claim. Since the MCMC target is exactly this calibrated discriminator distribution, the correctness of the entire bias-correction mechanism depends on an unverified assumption; this should be addressed explicitly, perhaps with a synthetic-data experiment that can validate whether the corrected samples are indeed closer to the true distribution.
minor comments (5)
  1. [References] Several cited references (e.g., [5]-[9], [11]-[12], [14]-[16], [19], [21]-[26]) appear unrelated to the surrounding text or are placeholder-like arXiv preprints. The authors should verify that each citation is relevant and necessary.
  2. [III.A] The frameworks 'DAMFT_FSL' and 'DAMFT_FSL2' are referenced as prior work, but no citation or description is given; a reader cannot determine what the earlier framework contributed or how this paper extends it.
  3. [Table 1] The caption of Table 1 reads 'TABLE 1. DATASET' but the table reports Inception Scores; the caption should be descriptive, such as 'GAN variants and Inception Score on CIFAR-10.'
  4. [Eq. (7)] The typesetting of Eq. (7) is garbled, with unclear summation indices and an ambiguous gamma term; the MHLoss definition should be rewritten cleanly so that the regularization weight and the summation over heads are unambiguous.
  5. [Table 3, abalone row] For the abalone dataset, the mhERGAN accuracy and precision are both reported as 0.8211 while F1 is 0.7229; please check the internal consistency of these metrics and clarify how they were computed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported gains are empirical measurements, not quantities derived from fitted inputs, so the central claim is not self-referential.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The central claims are empirical comparisons (Tables 1-3): inception scores of generated sets and few-shot classification metrics of MhERGAN versus hGAN. None of these quantities is a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no constant is solved from the target outcome. The reparameterized-GAN correction is specified algorithmically as MCMC sampling toward the discriminator-implied distribution; even if Equation (6)'s acceptance ratio is formally suspect because it lacks an explicit density-ratio or Jacobian conversion, that is a correctness or validation problem, not a definitional equivalence between input and output. The Section IV.C statement that MhERGAN outperforms SMOTE and ROS is unsupported because no SMOTE/ROS results are shown in Tables 2 and 3, but missing evidence is not circularity. The paper extends an unnamed 'DAMFT_FSL framework,' yet it does not cite a self-authorship theorem or uniqueness result as load-bearing evidence; the method itself is described in the paper. The assumption that 'discrimination is an easier learning task than generation' (Section III-A-1) is a stated premise, not a conclusion obtained from itself. No step reduces an equation to its own input, and no known result is merely renamed. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities. Its central claim rests on standard GAN and MCMC machinery plus the unproven assumption that the discriminator's distribution is more reliable than the generator's on tiny datasets. All experimental hyperparameters are chosen by hand and not reported, which reduces the transferability of the method.

free parameters (5)
  • Number of sub-discriminators T = 5
    Chosen without ablation or justification in Section IV-A.
  • MCMC step size tau = not specified
    Langevin sampling step size in equation (5), hand-selected, not reported.
  • MCMC noise epsilon = not specified
    Random noise scale in equation (5), not reported.
  • Fine-tuning epochs epl = not specified
    Increased iteration count for fine-tuning; exact value not given.
  • MHLoss regularization weight gamma = not specified
    Weight in MHLoss equation (7), not reported.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math GAN minimax objective as defined in Goodfellow et al.
    Used as the foundation of the data augmentation module in Section II-A.
  • standard math Metropolis-Hastings sampling converges to the target distribution
    MCMC correction in Section III-A-4 relies on this convergence property.
  • ad hoc to paper Discriminator's distribution is more accurate than the generator's on few-shot data
    Stated in Section III-A-1; if false, the bias correction mechanism loses its justification.
  • domain assumption Bagging ensemble reduces variance and bias
    Used in Section III-A-1 to justify discriminator ensemble.
  • ad hoc to paper Calibrating the discriminator by maximizing the distance between real and generated outputs improves its distribution
    Discussed in Section III-A-3; no proof or prior citation provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhancing Few-Shot Learning with Integrated Data and GAN Model Approaches." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4YFQRBXJ

@misc{pith2026241116567,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhancing Few-Shot Learning with Integrated Data and GAN Model Approaches},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4YFQRBXJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16567}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents an innovative approach to enhancing few-shot learning by integrating data augmentation with model fine-tuning in a framework designed to tackle the challenges posed by small-sample data. Recognizing the critical limitations of traditional machine learning models that require large datasets-especially in fields such as drug discovery, target recognition, and malicious traffic detection-this study proposes a novel strategy that leverages Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and advanced optimization techniques to improve model performance with limited data. Specifically, the paper addresses the noise and bias issues introduced by data augmentation methods, contrasting them with model-based approaches, such as fine-tuning and metric learning, which rely heavily on related datasets. By combining Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling and discriminative model ensemble strategies within a GAN framework, the proposed model adjusts generative and discriminative distributions to simulate a broader range of relevant data. Furthermore, it employs MHLoss and a reparameterized GAN ensemble to enhance stability and accelerate convergence, ultimately leading to improved classification performance on small-sample images and structured datasets. Results confirm that the MhERGAN algorithm developed in this research is highly effective for few-shot learning, offering a practical solution that bridges data scarcity with high-performing model adaptability and generalization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16567 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. GAN The objective function is shown in equation (1), where 𝐷(𝒙) represents the probability that discriminator classifies real sample 𝒙 as real, and 𝐷(𝐺(𝐳)) represents the probability that discriminator classifies generated sample 𝐺(𝐳) as real. From equation (1), we can see that discriminator D aims to maximize the distance between generated and original data distributions, while generator G aims to minimize the maxi… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 10 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Collaborative Optimization in Financial Data Mining Through Deep Learning and ResNeXt

    cs.LG 2024-12 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A ResNeXt-based multi-task learning model reportedly outperforms LSTM, Transformer, MCCNN, and DSN on S&P 500 classification and regression, but the experiments lack error bars, code, and leakage controls.

  2. Computer Vision-Driven Gesture Recognition: Toward Natural and Intuitive Human-Computer

    cs.CV 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A CNN-LSTM gesture recognizer with a decorative 3D skeleton visualization that reports unverifiable accuracy and speed numbers.

  3. Dynamic Scheduling Strategies for Resource Optimization in Computing Environments

    cs.DC 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A weighted-sum container placement objective solved with a genetic algorithm is claimed to outperform static rules and heuristics on Google Cluster Data, but the comparison lacks methodology, baselines, and code.

  4. Adaptive User Interface Generation Through Reinforcement Learning: A Data-Driven Approach to Personalization and Optimization

    cs.HC 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A DQN-based reinforcement learning system is reported to reach CTR 0.78 and RR 0.83 on an unverified CLIP Interactions dataset, beating five baselines, but no reproducible evidence is provided.

  5. Machine Learning Techniques for Pattern Recognition in High-Dimensional Data Mining

    cs.LG 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    An SVM-based frequent pattern mining method is claimed to outperform FP-Growth, FP-Tree, decision trees, and random forests, but the paper provides no reproducible experimental support.

  6. Dynamic User Interface Generation for Enhanced Human-Computer Interaction Using Variational Autoencoders

    cs.HC 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A vanilla VAE trained on the RICO dataset is reported to beat AE, GAN, cGAN, DBN, and VAE-GAN on SSIM/MAE for UI generation, but the comparison is under-specified and the dynamic feedback claim is untested.

  7. AI-Driven Health Monitoring of Distributed Computing Architecture: Insights from XGBoost and SHAP

    cs.DC 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    An XGBoost model with SHAP explanations is applied to edge node health classification, but the weak reported accuracy and missing experimental details do not support the paper's claims.

  8. Optimizing Multi-Task Learning for Enhanced Performance in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A multi-task GPT-4 model is said to beat single-task GPT-4, GPT-3, BERT, and Bi-LSTM on classification and summarization, but the experimental evidence is not reported.

  9. Advanced Risk Prediction and Stability Assessment of Banks Using Time Series Transformer Models

    q-fin.RM 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A standard Time Series Transformer is compared with five baselines on the UCI Bank Marketing dataset and reported as best for bank stability prediction, but the dataset contains no bank stability index.

  10. A Matrix Logic Approach to Efficient Frequent Itemset Discovery in Large Data Sets

    cs.DB 2024-12 reject novelty 1.0 of 10

    The paper restates the standard Boolean matrix (vertical bit-vector) approach to frequent itemset mining and reports self-measured runtime and memory on the Groceries dataset without any baseline comparison.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 10 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Low data drug discovery with one-shot learning,

    H. Altae -Tran, B. Ramsundar, A. S. Pappu, et al., "Low data drug discovery with one-shot learning," ACS Central Science, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 283–293, 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    A Systematic Study on the Privacy Protection Mechanism of Natural Language Processing in Medical Health Records

    X. Fei, S. Chai, W. He, L. Dai, R. Xu, and L. Cai, "A Systematic Study on the Privacy Protection Mechanism of Natural Language Processing in Medical Health Records", Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Sensors, Electronics and Comp uter Engineering (ICSECE), pp. 1819-1824, Aug. 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Leveraging Deep Learning Techniques for Enhanced Analysis of Medical Textual Data

    Y. Cang, Y. Zhong, R. Ji, Y. Liang, Y. Lei, and J. Wang, "Leveraging Deep Learning Techniques for Enhanced Analysis of Medical Textual Data", Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Sensors, Electronics and Computer Engineering (ICSECE ), pp. 1259 - 1263, Aug. 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Machine learning for encrypted malicious traffic detection: Approaches, datasets and comparative study,

    Z. Wang, K. W. Fok, V. L. L. Thing, "Machine learning for encrypted malicious traffic detection: Approaches, datasets and comparative study," Computers & Security, vol. 113, pp. 102542, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Financial Risk Analysis Using Integrated Data and Transformer -Based Deep Learning

    Y. Wei, K. Xu, J. Yao, M. Sun, and Y. Sun, "Financial Risk Analysis Using Integrated Data and Transformer -Based Deep Learning", Journal of Computer Science and Software Applications, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1 -8, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    A Recommendation Model Utilizing Separation Embedding and Self - Attention for Feature Mining

    W. Liu, R. Wang, Y. Luo, J. Wei, Z. Zhao, and J. Huang, "A Recommendation Model Utilizing Separation Embedding and Self - Attention for Feature Mining", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15026, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Advanced RAG Models with Graph Structures: Optimizing Complex Knowledge Reasoning and Text Generation

    Y. Dong, S. Wang, H. Zheng, J. Chen, Z. Zhang, and C. Wang, "Advanced RAG Models with Graph Structures: Optimizing Complex Knowledge Reasoning and Text Generation", arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.03572, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Metric Learning for Tag Recommendation: Tackling Data Sparsity and Cold Start Issues,

    Y. Luo, R. Wang, Y. Liang, A. Liang, and W. Liu, "Metric Learning for Tag Recommendation: Tackling Data Sparsity and Cold Start Issues," arXiv preprint, arXiv:2411.06374, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 28 references
  1. [9]

    Efficient and Aesthetic UI Design with a Deep Learning -Based Interface Generation Tree Algorithm

    S. Duan, R. Zhang, M. Chen, Z. Wang, and S. Wang, "Efficient and Aesthetic UI Design with a Deep Learning -Based Interface Generation Tree Algorithm", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17586, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Generative adversarial networks,

    I. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, et al., "Generative adversarial networks," Communications of the ACM , vol. 63, no. 11, pp. 139 –144, 2020

    2020

  3. [11]

    Self - Supervised Graph Neural Networks for Enhanced Feature Extraction in Heterogeneous Information Networks

    J. Wei, Y. Liu, X. Huang, X. Zhang, W. Liu, and X. Yan, "Self - Supervised Graph Neural Networks for Enhanced Feature Extraction in Heterogeneous Information Networks", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17617, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Balancing Innovation and Privacy: Data Security Strategies in Natural Language Processing Applications

    S. Liu, G. Liu, B. Zhu, Y. Luo, L. Wu, and R. Wang, "Balancing Innovation and Privacy: Data Security Strategies in Natural Language Processing Applications", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.08553, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Wasserstein generative adversarial networks,

    M. Arjovsky, S. Chintala, L. Bottou, "Wasserstein generative adversarial networks," Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, vol. 70, pp. 214–223, 2017

    2017

  6. [14]

    Automated Genre -Aware Article Scoring and Feedback Using Large Language Models

    C. Wang, Y. Dong, Z. Zhang, R. Wang, S. Wang, and J. Chen, "Automated Genre -Aware Article Scoring and Feedback Using Large Language Models", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14165, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Research on Intelligent System of Medical Image Recognition and Disease Diagnosis Based on Big Data

    Y. Zi, X. Cheng, T. Mei, Q. Wang, Z. Gao, and H. Yang, "Research on Intelligent System of Medical Image Recognition and Disease Diagnosis Based on Big Data", Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Image Processing and Computer Applica tions (ICIPCA), pp. ...

    2024

  8. [16]

    ALBERT -Driven Ensemble Learning for Medical Text Classification

    Y. Cang, W. Yang, D. Sun, Z. Ye, and Z. Zheng, "ALBERT -Driven Ensemble Learning for Medical Text Classification", Journal of Computer Technology and Software, vol. 3, no. 6, 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Emotion -Aware Interaction Design in Intelligent User Interface Using Multi-Modal Deep Learning,

    S. Duan, Z. Wang, S. Wang, M. Chen, and R. Zhang, "Emotion -Aware Interaction Design in Intelligent User Interface Using Multi-Modal Deep Learning," arXiv preprint, arXiv:2411.06326, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    A study on intra -modal constraint loss toward cross-modal recipe retrieval,

    J. Lu, H. Kyutoku, K. Doman, et al., "A study on intra -modal constraint loss toward cross-modal recipe retrieval," IEICE Technical Report, 2021

    2021

  11. [19]

    Graph Neural Networks in Financial Markets: Modeling Volatility and Assessing Value-at-Risk

    K. Xu, Y. Wu, H. Xia, N. Sang, and B. Wang, "Graph Neural Networks in Financial Markets: Modeling Volatility and Assessing Value-at-Risk", Journal of Computer Technology and Software, vol. 1, no. 2, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    A Lightweight GAN-Based Image Fusion Algorithm for Visible and Infrared Images

    Z. Wu, J. Chen, L. Tan, H. Gong, Y. Zhou, and G. Shi, "A Lightweight GAN-Based Image Fusion Algorithm for Visible and Infrared Images", Proceedings of the 2024 4th International Conference on Computer Science and Blockchain (CCSB), pp. 466-470, Sept. 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Survival prediction across diverse cancer types using neural networks

    X. Yan, W. Wang, M. Xiao, Y. Li, and M. Gao, "Survival prediction across diverse cancer types using neural networks", Proceedings of the 2024 7th International Conference on Machine Vision and Applications, pp. 134-138, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Reinforcement Learning for Adaptive Resource Scheduling in Complex System Environments

    P. Li, Y. Xiao, J. Yan, X. Li, and X. Wang, "Reinforcement Learning for Adaptive Resource Scheduling in Complex System Environments", arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05346, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Applying Hybrid Graph Neural Networks to Strengthen Credit Risk Analysis

    M. Sun, W. Sun, Y. Sun, S. Liu, M. Jiang, and Z. Xu, "Applying Hybrid Graph Neural Networks to Strengthen Credit Risk Analysis", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04283, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Medical Image Segmentation with Bilateral Spatial Attention and Transfer Learning

    D. Sun, M. Sui, Y. Liang, J. Hu, and J. Du, "Medical Image Segmentation with Bilateral Spatial Attention and Transfer Learning", Journal of Computer Science and Software Applications, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 19 -27, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Predicting Liquidity Coverage Ratio with Gated Recurrent Units: A Deep Learning Model for Risk Management

    Z. Xu, J. Pan, S. Han, H. Ouyang, Y. Chen, and M. Jiang, "Predicting Liquidity Coverage Ratio with Gated Recurrent Units: A Deep Learning Model for Risk Management", arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.19211, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Unveiling the Potential of Graph Neural Networks in SME Credit Risk Assessment

    B. Liu, I. Li, J. Yao, Y. Chen, G. Huang, and J. Wang, "Unveiling the Potential of Graph Neural Networks in SME Credit Risk Assessment", arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.17909, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bagging, boosting, and C4.5,

    J. R. Quinlan, "Bagging, boosting, and C4.5," Proceedings of the AAAI/IAAI Conference, vol. 1, pp. 725–730, 1996

    1996

  20. [28]

    Investigation of Creating Accessibility Linked Data Based on Publicly Available Accessibility Datasets

    Y. Li, X. Yan, M. Xiao, W. Wang and F. Zhang, "Investigation of Creating Accessibility Linked Data Based on Publicly Available Accessibility Datasets", Proceedings of the 2023 13th International Conference on Communication and Network Security, pp. 77-81, 2024

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.