Direct Discovery of High Utility Itemsets without Candidate Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Utility mining emerged recently to address the limitation of frequent itemset mining by introducing interestingness measures that reflect both the statistical significance and the user's expectation. Among utility mining problems, utility mining with the itemset share framework is a hard one as no anti-monotone property holds with the interestingness measure. The state-of-the-art works on this problem all employ a two-phase, candidate generation approach, which suffers from the scalability issue due to the huge number of candidates. This paper proposes a high utility itemset growth approach that works in a single phase without generating candidates. Our basic approach is to enumerate itemsets by prefix extensions, to prune search space by utility upper bounding, and to maintain original utility information in the mining process by a novel data structure. Such a data structure enables us to compute a tight bound for powerful pruning and to directly identify high utility itemsets in an efficient and scalable way. We further enhance the efficiency significantly by introducing recursive irrelevant item filtering with sparse data, and a lookahead strategy with dense data. Extensive experiments on sparse and dense, synthetic and real data suggest that our algorithm outperforms the state-of-the-art algorithms over one order of magnitude.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".