Discovering Transitional Patterns and Their Significant Milestones in Transaction Databases
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A transaction database usually consists of a set of time-stamped transactions. Mining frequent patterns in transaction databases has been studied extensively in data mining research. However, most of the existing frequent pattern mining algorithms (such as Apriori and FP-growth) do not consider the time stamps associated with the transactions. In this paper, we extend the existing frequent pattern mining framework to take into account the time stamp of each transaction and discover patterns whose frequency dramatically changes over time. We define a new type of patterns, called transitional patterns, to capture the dynamic behavior of frequent patterns in a transaction database. Transitional patterns include both positive and negative transitional patterns. Their frequencies increase/decrease dramatically at some time points of a transaction database. We introduce the concept of significant milestones for a transitional pattern, which are time points at which the frequency of the pattern changes most significantly. Moreover, we develop an algorithm to mine from a transaction database the set of transitional patterns along with their significant milestones. Our experimental studies on real-world databases illustrate that mining positive and negative transitional patterns is highly promising as a practical and useful approach for discovering novel and interesting knowledge from large databases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it