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
Existing association rule mining algorithms suffer from many problems when mining massive transactional datasets. One major problem is the high memory dependency: either the gigantic data structure built is assumed to fit in main memory, or the recursive mining process is too voracious in memory resources. Another major impediment is the repetitive and interactive nature of any knowledge discovery process. To tune parameters, many runs of the same algorithms are necessary leading to the building of these huge data structures time and again. This paper proposes a new disk-based association rule mining algorithm called Inverted Matrix, which achieves its efficiency by applying three new ideas. First, transactional data is converted into a new database layout called Inverted Matrix that prevents multiple scanning of the database during the mining phase, in which finding frequent patterns could be achieved in less than a full scan with random access. Second, for each frequent item, a relatively small independent tree is built summarizing co-occurrences. Finally, a simple and non-recursive mining process reduces the memory requirements as minimum candidacy generation and counting is needed. Experimental studies reveal that our Inverted Matrix approach outperform FP-Tree especially in mining very large transactional databases with a very large number of unique items. Our random access disk-based approach is particularly advantageous in a repetitive and interactive setting.
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 | 0.000 | 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