MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150689251 · doi:10.1504/ijdmb.2013.054696

A clustering approach for estimating parameters of a profile hidden Markov model

2013· article· en· W2150689251 on OpenAlexafffund
Rosa Aghdam, Hamid Pezeshk, Seyed Amir Malekpour, Soudabeh Shemehsavar, Changiz Eslahchi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data Mining and Bioinformatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TehranIran National Science Foundation
KeywordsHidden Markov modelCluster analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceMarkov chain Monte CarloMarkov chainArtificial intelligenceMarkov modelBayesian probabilityMathematicsAlgorithmMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Profile Hidden Markov Model (PHMM) is a standard form of a Hidden Markov Models used for modeling protein and DNA sequence families based on multiple alignment. In this paper, we implement Baum-Welch algorithm and the Bayesian Monte Carlo Markov Chain (BMCMC) method for estimating parameters of small artificial PHMM. In order to improve the prediction accuracy of the estimation of the parameters of the PHMM, we classify the training data using the weighted values of sequences in the PHMM then apply an algorithm for estimating parameters of the PHMM. The results show that the BMCMC method performs better than the Maximum Likelihood estimation.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designSimulation or modeling · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data Mining and BioinformaticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207