Efficient algorithms for mining constrained frequent patterns from uncertain data
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
Mining of frequent patterns is one of the popular knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD) tasks. It also plays an essential role in the mining of many other patterns such as correlation, sequences, and association rules. Hence, it has been the subject of numerous studies since its introduction. Most of these studies find all the frequent patterns from collection of precise data, in which the items within each datum or transaction are definitely known and precise. However, there are many real-life situations in which the user is interested in only some tiny portions of these frequent patterns. Finding all frequent patterns would then be redundant and waste lots of computation. This calls for constrained mining, which aims to find only those frequent patterns that are interesting to the user. Moreover, there are also many reallife situations in which the data are uncertain. This calls for uncertain data mining. In this paper, we propose an algorithm to efficiently find constrained frequent patterns from collections of uncertain data.
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 | 0.002 | 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