MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106435568 · doi:10.1145/1081870.1081948

A fast kernel-based multilevel algorithm for graph clustering

2005· article· en· W2106435568 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Inderjit S. Dhillon, Yuqiang Guan, Brian Kulis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceCorrelation clusteringAlgorithmGraph partitionClustering coefficientSpectral clusteringGraphCURE data clustering algorithmPower graph analysisCanopy clustering algorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graph clustering (also called graph partitioning) --- clustering the nodes of a graph --- is an important problem in diverse data mining applications. Traditional approaches involve optimization of graph clustering objectives such as normalized cut or ratio association; spectral methods are widely used for these objectives, but they require eigenvector computation which can be slow. Recently, graph clustering with a general cut objective has been shown to be mathematically equivalent to an appropriate weighted kernel k-means objective function. In this paper, we exploit this equivalence to develop a very fast multilevel algorithm for graph clustering. Multilevel approaches involve coarsening, initial partitioning and refinement phases, all of which may be specialized to different graph clustering objectives. Unlike existing multilevel clustering approaches, such as METIS, our algorithm does not constrain the cluster sizes to be nearly equal. Our approach gives a theoretical guarantee that the refinement step decreases the graph cut objective under consideration. Experiments show that we achieve better final objective function values as compared to a state-of-the-art spectral clustering algorithm: on a series of benchmark test graphs with up to thirty thousand nodes and one million edges, our algorithm achieves lower normalized cut values in 67% of our experiments and higher ratio association values in 100% of our experiments. Furthermore, on large graphs, our algorithm is significantly faster than spectral methods. Finally, our algorithm requires far less memory than spectral methods; we cluster a 1.2 million node movie network into 5000 clusters, which due to memory requirements cannot be done directly with spectral methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations121
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207