Distributed Peer-to-Peer Cooperative Partitional-Divisive Clustering for gene expression datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clustering techniques are helpful in understanding gene regulation, cellular processes, and subtypes of cells. A major thrust of gene expression analysis over the last twenty years has been the acquisition of enormous amount of various distributed sources of gene expression datasets. Thus, it is becoming increasingly important to perform clustering of distributed data in-place, without the need to pool it first into a central node. The general goal of distributed clustering is achieving a level of speedup than the centralized approaches. A recent study shows that centralized cooperative clustering outperforms the non-cooperative centralized clustering approaches. In this paper a novel distributed cooperative partitional-divisive clustering in a peer-to-peer network is presented. The distributed CPDC approach is based on intermediate cooperation between the Partitional k-means and the divisive bisecting k-means in a distributed Peer-to-Peer network to produce better global solutions. Computational experiments were conducted to test the performance of the distributed CPDC approach using different gene expression datasets. Undertaken experimental results show that the performance of the distributed CPDC method is better than that of the non-cooperative distributed k-means and distributed bisecting k-means. Thus a new cooperative technique for distributed gene expression repositories is efficiently presented to discover regularities and genes that may span multiple nodes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".