Functional Decomposition of the Clustering Approach for Matrix-Based Structuring
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In engineering design, matrices have been commonly used to capture dependency relationships for structure-related problems (e.g., product architecture, process workflow, and team organization). In this context, structuring is considered a group formation process that clusters the design entities and identifies the interactions among the formed groups. To support matrix-based design structuring, this paper proposes a clustering approach that has three phases in the working procedure. Firstly, the coupling analysis is used to assess the coupling strength of any two entities according to the application context. Secondly, the sorting analysis is used to organize the matrix’s rows and columns by bringing the highly coupled entities close to each other, thus yielding a sorted matrix. Thirdly, the partitioning analysis is applied to form a structured matrix that identifies the groups of entities and their interactions based on some structural criteria (e.g., number of groups, limits on group sizes, etc). The proposed clustering method has been applied to four engineering examples to demonstrate its flexibility and adaptability in tackling different design structuring problems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it