Agglomerative genetic algorithm for clustering in social networks
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
Size and complexity of data repositories collaboratively created by Web users generate a need for new processing approaches. In this paper, we study the problem of detection of fine-grained communities of users in social networks, which can be defined as clustering with a large number of clusters. The practical size of social networks makes the traditional evolutionary based clustering approaches, which represent the entire clustering solution as one individual, hard to apply. We propose an Agglomerative Clustering Genetic Algorithm (ACGA): a population of clusters evolves from the initial state in which each cluster represents one user to a high quality clustering solution. Each step of the evolutionary process is performed locally, engaging only a small part of the social network limited to two clusters and their direct neighborhood. This makes the algorithm practically useful independently of the size of the network. Evaluation on two social network models indicates that ACGA is potentially able to detect communities with accuracy comparable or better than two typical centralized clustering algorithms even though ACGA works under much stricter conditions.
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