Granular clustering: a granular signature of data
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
The study is devoted to a granular analysis of data. We develop a new clustering algorithm that organizes findings about data in the form of a collection of information granules-hyperboxes. The clustering carried out here is an example of a granulation mechanism. We discuss a compatibility measure guiding a construction (growth) of the clusters and explain a rationale behind their development. The clustering promotes a data mining way of problem solving by emphasizing the transparency of the results (hyperboxes). We discuss a number of indexes describing hyperboxes and expressing relationships between such information granules. It is also shown how the resulting family of the information granules is a concise descriptor of the structure of the data-a granular signature of the data. We examine the properties of features (variables) occurring of the problem as they manifest in the setting of the information granules. Numerical experiments are carried out based on two-dimensional (2-D) synthetic data as well as multivariable Boston data available on the WWW.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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