MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075772152 · doi:10.1145/1774088.1774305

Mining uncertain data for frequent itemsets that satisfy aggregate constraints

2010· article· en· W2075772152 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggregate (composite)Computer scienceDatabase transactionConstraint (computer-aided design)Data miningUncertain dataProcess (computing)ComputationTree (set theory)DatabaseAlgorithmEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many existing algorithms mine transaction databases of precise data for frequent itemsets. However, there are situations in which the user is interested in only some tiny portions of all the frequent itemsets, and there are also situations in which data in the transaction databases are uncertain. This calls for both (i) constrained mining (for finding only those frequent itemsets that satisfy user constraints, which express the user interest) and (ii) mining uncertain data. In this paper, we propose a tree-based algorithm that effectively mines transaction databases of uncertain data for only those frequent itemsets satisfying the user-specified aggregate constraints. The algorithm avoids candidate generation and pushes the aggregate constraints inside the mining process, which reduces computation and avoids unnecessary constraint checking.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207