MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129546202 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2009.174

An Efficient Concept-Based Mining Model for Enhancing Text Clustering

2009· article· en· W2129546202 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSentenceNatural language processingPhraseTerm (time)Similarity (geometry)Semantics (computer science)Cluster analysisArtificial intelligenceDocument clusteringMeaning (existential)Word (group theory)Measure (data warehouse)Information retrievalSimilarity measureSemantic similarityData miningLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the common techniques in text mining are based on the statistical analysis of a term, either word or phrase. Statistical analysis of a term frequency captures the importance of the term within a document only. However, two terms can have the same frequency in their documents, but one term contributes more to the meaning of its sentences than the other term. Thus, the underlying text mining model should indicate terms that capture the semantics of text. In this case, the mining model can capture terms that present the concepts of the sentence, which leads to discovery of the topic of the document. A new concept-based mining model that analyzes terms on the sentence, document, and corpus levels is introduced. The concept-based mining model can effectively discriminate between nonimportant terms with respect to sentence semantics and terms which hold the concepts that represent the sentence meaning. The proposed mining model consists of sentence-based concept analysis, document-based concept analysis, corpus-based concept-analysis, and concept-based similarity measure. The term which contributes to the sentence semantics is analyzed on the sentence, document, and corpus levels rather than the traditional analysis of the document only. The proposed model can efficiently find significant matching concepts between documents, according to the semantics of their sentences. The similarity between documents is calculated based on a new concept-based similarity measure. The proposed similarity measure takes full advantage of using the concept analysis measures on the sentence, document, and corpus levels in calculating the similarity between documents. Large sets of experiments using the proposed concept-based mining model on different data sets in text clustering are conducted. The experiments demonstrate extensive comparison between the concept-based analysis and the traditional analysis. Experimental results demonstrate the substantial enhancement of the clustering quality using the sentence-based, document-based, corpus-based, and combined approach concept analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.253 · 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