MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162062774 · doi:10.1109/isvd.2006.18

CRYSTAL - A new density-based fast and efficient clustering algorithm

2006· article· en· W2162062774 on OpenAlexafffund
Priyadarshi Bhattacharya, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsDelaunay triangulationCluster analysisCURE data clustering algorithmCorrelation clusteringComputer scienceCanopy clustering algorithmBowyer–Watson algorithmFuzzy clusteringDBSCANSingle-linkage clusteringAlgorithmRegular polygonCluster (spacecraft)Voronoi diagramData miningArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a fast O(nlogn) clustering algorithm based on Delaunay triangulation for identifying clusters of different shapes, not necessarily convex. The clustering result is similar to human perception of clusters. The novelty of our method is the growth model we follow in the cluster formation that resembles the natural growth of a crystal. Our algorithm is able to identify dense as well as sparse clusters and also clusters connected by bridges. We demonstrate clustering results on several synthetic datasets and provide a comparison with popular K-means based clustering methods. The clustering is based purely on proximity analysis in the Delaunay triangulation and avoids usage of global parameters. It is robust in the presence of noise. Finally, we demonstrate the capability of our clustering algorithm in handling very large datasets.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.006

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207