MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096784803 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2007.1095

High-Dimensional Unsupervised Selection and Estimation of a Finite Generalized Dirichlet Mixture Model Based on Minimum Message Length

2007· article· en· W2096784803 on OpenAlexaff
Nizar Bouguila, Djemel Ziou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeConcordia University
FundersUniversity of California, Irvine
KeywordsMinimum description lengthGeneralized Dirichlet distributionMixture modelHierarchical Dirichlet processDirichlet distributionCluster analysisLatent Dirichlet allocationMathematicsComputer scienceModel selectionAlgorithmDetermining the number of clusters in a data setAutomatic summarizationPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceTopic modelDirichlet's principleCorrelation clusteringCURE data clustering algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of determining the structure of high-dimensional data, without prior knowledge of the number of clusters. Data are represented by a finite mixture model based on the generalized Dirichlet distribution. The generalized Dirichlet distribution has a more general covariance structure than the Dirichlet distribution and offers high flexibility and ease of use for the approximation of both symmetric and asymmetric distributions. This makes the generalized Dirichlet distribution more practical and useful. An important problem in mixture modeling is the determination of the number of clusters. Indeed, a mixture with too many or too few components may not be appropriate to approximate the true model. Here, we consider the application of the minimum message length (MML) principle to determine the number of clusters. The MML is derived so as to choose the number of clusters in the mixture model which best describes the data. A comparison with other selection criteria is performed. The validation involves synthetic data, real data clustering, and two interesting real applications: classification of web pages, and texture database summarization for efficient retrieval.

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)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations169
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207