MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014351728 · doi:10.1109/iv.2012.61

Visualizing Community Centric Network Layouts

2012· article· en· W2014351728 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

Venue2012 16th International Conference on Information Visualisation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBounding overwatchComputer scienceFocus (optics)Community structureFrame (networking)Minimum bounding boxData miningTheoretical computer scienceInformation retrievalData scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present our COMmunity Boundary (COMB) and COMmunity Circles (COMC) network layout algorithms that focus on revealing the structure of discovered communities and the relationships between these communities. We believe this information is vital when developing new community mining algorithms as it allows the viewer to more quickly assess the quality of a mining result without appealing to large tables of statistics. To implement our algorithms we have introduced numerous modifications to the existing Fruchterman-Reingold layout, including support for multi-sized vertices, removal of the bounding frame, introduction of circular bounding boxes, and a novel slotting system. Our evaluation argues that both COMB and COMC outperform existing alternatives in their ability to reveal community structure and emphasize inter-community relations.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.287 · 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