MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026060326 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2012.151

NHOP: A Nested Associative Pattern for Analysis of Consensus Sequence Ensembles

2012· article· en· W2026060326 on OpenAlexafffund
David Chiu, Thomas W.H. Lui

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAssociative propertyComputer scienceSequence (biology)Tree (set theory)Theoretical computer scienceTree structurePattern recognition (psychology)Core (optical fiber)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmData miningComputational biologyMathematicsCombinatoricsBiologyBinary tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research, we introduce a novel, complex associative pattern that is found to be very useful because it identifies the core associative structure from the data. We refer to it as nested high-order pattern. The pattern is more specific than associative patterns represented as multiple variables. It also generalizes sequential patterns, as the outcomes need not be contiguous. This paper outlines two search algorithms, the $(r)$-Tree and Best-$(k)$ algorithm in its detection. It was then applied to an analysis of biomolecule using the aligned sequence family of the molecule. In the SH3 protein, a model for protein-protein interaction mediator, we identify functional groups (core and binding sites) in the three-dimensional structure as well as amino acid patterns dominating certain species.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data EngineeringSame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207