MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983506100 · doi:10.1145/568574.568581

Exploiting succinct constraints using FP-trees

2002· article· en· W1983506100 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

VenueACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePruningFocus (optics)SuccinctnessSet (abstract data type)Constraint (computer-aided design)Tree (set theory)Data miningSearch treeTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmSearch algorithmProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its introduction, frequent-set mining has been generalized to many forms, which include constrained data mining. The use of constraints permits user focus and guidance, enables user exploration and control, and leads to effective pruning of the search space and efficient mining of frequent itemsets. In this paper, we focus on the use of succinct constraints. In particular, we propose a novel algorithm called FPS to mine frequent itemsets satisfying succinct constraints. The FPS algorithm avoids the generate-and-test paradigm by exploiting succinctness properties of the constraints in a FP-tree based framework. In terms of functionality, our algorithm is capable of handling not just the succinct aggregate constraint, but any succinct constraint in general. Moreover, it handles multiple succinct constraints. In terms of performance, our algorithm is more efficient and effective than existing FP-tree based constrained frequent-set mining algorithms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.174 · 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