MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138629976 · doi:10.5539/mas.v4n7p148

Ontology Based Fuzzy Document Clustering Scheme

2010· article· en· W2138629976 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Thangamani, P. Thangaraj

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceDocument clusteringFuzzy clusteringVector space modelSemantic similarityInformation retrievalOntologyData miningClustering high-dimensional dataArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207