MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097433879 · doi:10.2202/1557-4679.1223

A Pseudo-EM Algorithm for Clustering Incomplete Longitudinal Data

2010· article· en· W2097433879 on OpenAlexafffund
Mateen Shaikh, Paul D. McNicholas, Anthony F. Desmond

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Biostatistics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCluster analysisCholesky decompositionExpectation–maximization algorithmCovarianceComputer scienceFocus (optics)Missing dataData miningMultivariate statisticsAlgorithmMultivariate normal distributionDetermining the number of clusters in a data setCURE data clustering algorithmMathematicsCorrelation clusteringStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMaximum likelihoodMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for clustering incomplete longitudinal data, and gene expression time course data in particular, is presented. Specifically, an existing method that utilizes mixtures of multivariate Gaussian distributions with modified Cholesky-decomposed covariance structure is extended to accommodate incomplete data. Parameter estimation is carried out in a fashion that is similar to an expectation-maximization algorithm. We focus on the particular application of clustering incomplete gene expression time course data. In this application, our approach gives good clustering performance when compared to the results when there is no missing data. Possible extensions of this work are also suggested.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of BiostatisticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207