SCS: A New Similarity Measure for Categorical Sequences
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
Measuring the similarity between categorical sequences is a fundamental process in many data mining applications. A key issue is to extract and make use of significant features hidden behind the chronological and structural dependencies found in these sequences. Almost all existing algorithms designed to perform this task are based on the matching of patterns in chronological order, but such sequences often have similar structural features in chronologically different positions. In this paper we propose SCS, a novel method for measuring the similarity between categorical sequences, based on an original pattern matching scheme that makes it possible to capture chronological and non-chronological dependencies. SCS captures significant patterns that represent the natural structure of sequences, and reduces the influence of those representing noise. It constitutes an effective approach for measuring the similarity of data such as biological sequences, natural language texts and financial transactions. To show its effectiveness, we have tested SCS extensively on a range of datasets, and compared the results with those obtained by various mainstream algorithms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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