MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982030926 · doi:10.2202/1544-6115.1261

Estimating Number of Clusters Based on a General Similarity Matrix with Application to Microarray Data

2008· article· en· W1982030926 on OpenAlexaff
Shafagh Fallah, David Tritchler, Joseph Beyene

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisSimilarity (geometry)Data miningComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Set (abstract data type)A priori and a posterioriData setModel selectionMatrix (chemical analysis)Determining the number of clusters in a data setArtificial intelligenceCorrelation clusteringCURE data clustering algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many clustering methods require that the number of clusters believed present in a given data set be specified a priori, and a number of methods for estimating the number of clusters have been developed. However, the selection of the number of clusters is well recognized as a difficult and open problem and there is a need for methods which can shed light on specific aspects of the data. This paper adopts a model for clustering based on a specific structure for a similarity matrix. Publicly available gene expression data sets are analyzed to illustrate the method and the performance of our method is assessed by simulation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations17
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular BiologySame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207