MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102416536 · doi:10.1145/1143844.1143953

An investigation of computational and informational limits in Gaussian mixture clustering

2006· article· en· W2102416536 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Srebro, Gregory Shakhnarovich, Sam T. Roweis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceMixture modelGaussianArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate under what conditions clus-tering by learning a mixture of spherical Gaussians is (a) computationally tractable; and (b) statistically possible. We show that using principal component projection greatly aids in recovering the clustering using EM; present empirical evidence that even using such a projection, there is still a large gap between the number of samples needed to re-cover the clustering using EM, and the num-ber of samples needed without computational restrictions; and characterize the regime in which such a gap exists. 1.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.290
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.290
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.022
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207