Ontology Based Fuzzy Document Clustering Scheme
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
Document clustering is the technique used to group up the document with the reference to the similarity. It is widely used in web mining and digital library environment. Documents are represented in vector space model. Each document is a vector in the word space and each element of the vector indicates the frequency of the corresponding word in the document. Documents are presented as high dimensional data elements. It is a very complex task to cluster documents using K-means clustering algorithm. The sub space clustering schemes can be adopted to cluster documents. The document clustering uses the term weights from the similarity measure. The sub space model uses the relevant attributes for the similarity estimation. The fuzzy logic is used to cluster the documents. The fuzzy document clustering scheme is enhanced with semantic analysis mechanism. Semantic analysis is carried out with the support of the ontology. The ontology is used to maintain term relationships. Term relationships are represented using the synonym, meronym and hypernym factors. Ontology is manually collected by the users. Domain based ontology is used for the document clustering process. The system uses the data mining domain based ontology for the semantic analysis. Semantic weights are used in the similarity measure. Fuzzy based text document clustering scheme uses the stop word filters and stemming process under the document preprocess. Term clustering and semantic clustering operations are performed in the system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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