MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outlier Detection Algorithm Basing on Similarity Measurement Relation

2012· article· en· W2008513768 on OpenAlex
Hong Fang

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

VenueAdvanced engineering forum · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsLa Cité Collégiale
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsOutlierAnomaly detectionSimilarity (geometry)Data miningRelation (database)Computer scienceIntrusion detection systemPattern recognition (psychology)Cluster analysisMetric (unit)Field (mathematics)Data setAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceDimension (graph theory)Credit card fraudCredit cardMathematicsImage (mathematics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outlier detection is an important field of data mining, which is widely used in credit card fraud detection, network intrusion detection ,etc. A kind of high dimensional data similarity metric function and the concept of class density are given in the paper, basing on the combination of hierarchical clustering and similarity, as well as outlier detection algorithm about similarity measurement is presented after the redefinition of high dimension density outliers is put. The algorithm has some value for outliers detection of high dimensional data set in view of experimental result.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.206 · 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