MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146606092 · doi:10.1145/1824795.1824798

A taxonomy of sequential pattern mining algorithms

2010· review· en· W2146606092 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Computing Surveys · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTaxonomy (biology)Tree traversalSequential Pattern MiningKey (lock)Data miningWeb miningInformation retrievalArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmWeb pageWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Owing to important applications such as mining web page traversal sequences, many algorithms have been introduced in the area of sequential pattern mining over the last decade, most of which have also been modified to support concise representations like closed, maximal, incremental or hierarchical sequences. This article presents a taxonomy of sequential pattern-mining techniques in the literature with web usage mining as an application. This article investigates these algorithms by introducing a taxonomy for classifying sequential pattern-mining algorithms based on important key features supported by the techniques. This classification aims at enhancing understanding of sequential pattern-mining problems, current status of provided solutions, and direction of research in this area. This article also attempts to provide a comparative performance analysis of many of the key techniques and discusses theoretical aspects of the categories in the taxonomy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.224 · 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