MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032713750 · doi:10.1142/s0219720007002941

EVALUATION OF NORMALIZATION AND PRE-CLUSTERING ISSUES IN A NOVEL CLUSTERING APPROACH: GLOBAL OPTIMUM SEARCH WITH ENHANCED POSITIONING

2007· article· en· W2032713750 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Meng Piao Tan, James R. Broach, Christodoulos A. Floudas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill UniversityFoundation for the National Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCluster analysisNormalization (sociology)Data miningComputer scienceCorrelation clusteringCURE data clustering algorithmOutlierFuzzy clusteringClustering high-dimensional dataConsensus clusteringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the effects on clustering quality by different normalization and pre-clustering techniques for a novel mixed-integer nonlinear optimization-based clustering algorithm, the Global Optimum Search with Enhanced Positioning (EP_GOS_Clust). These are important issues to be addressed. DNA microarray experiments are informative tools to elucidate gene regulatory networks. But in order for gene expression levels to be comparable across microarrays, normalization procedures have to be properly undertaken. The aim of pre-clustering is to use an adequate amount of discriminatory characteristics to form rough information profiles, so that data with similar features can be pre-grouped together and outliers deemed insignificant to the clustering process can be removed. Using experimental DNA microarray data from the yeast Saccharomyces Cerevisiae, we study the merits of pre-clustering genes based on distance/correlation comparisons and symbolic representations such as {+, o, -}. As a performance metric, we look at the intra- and inter-cluster error sums, two generic but intuitive measures of clustering quality. We also use publicly available Gene Ontology resources to assess the clusters' level of biological coherence. Our analysis indicates a significant effect by normalization and pre-clustering methods on the clustering results. Hence, the outcome of this study has significance in fine-tuning the EP_GOS_Clust clustering approach.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational BiologySame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207