MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114383673 · doi:10.1109/3477.990878

Granular clustering: a granular signature of data

2002· article· en· W2114383673 on OpenAlexaff
Witold Pedrycz, A Bargiela

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisGranular computingGranulationData miningComputer scienceSignature (topology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringRough set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations161
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics)Same topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207