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
As frequent pattern mining plays an essential role in many knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD) tasks, numerous algorithms for finding frequent patterns have been proposed over the past 15 years. However, most of these algorithms return the mining results in the form of textual lists containing frequent patterns showing those frequently occurring sets of items. It is well known that "a picture is worth a thousand words". The use of visual representation can enhance the user's understanding of the inherent relations in a collection of frequent patterns. In this paper, we develop a simple yet useful visual analytic tool for supporting frequent pattern mining called FpVAT . Such a visual analytic tool consists of two modules: One module gives users an overview so that they can derive insight from a massive amount of raw data; another module enables users to perform analytical reasoning on the mining results via interactive visual interfaces so that users can detect the expected frequent patterns and discover the unexpected frequent patterns. As a visual analytic tool, our FpVAT is equipped with several interactive features for effective visual support in the data analysis and KDD process for various real-life applications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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