MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186966566 · doi:10.19026/rjaset.8.986

Rough K-means Outlier Factor Based on Entropy Computation

2014· article· en· W2186966566 on OpenAlexaff
Djoko Budiyanto Setyohadi, Azuraliza Abu Bakar, Zulaiha Ali Othman

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Journal of Applied Sciences Engineering and Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocal outlier factorOutlierAnomaly detectionPattern recognition (psychology)Cluster analysisComputer scienceEntropy (arrow of time)Data miningComputationArtificial intelligenceCluster (spacecraft)MathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies of outlier detection have been developed based on the cluster-based outlier detection approach, since it does not need any prior knowledge of the dataset. However, the previous studies only regard the outlier factor computation with respect to a single point or a small cluster, which reflects its deviates from a common cluster. Furthermore, all objects within outlier cluster are assumed to be similar. The outlier objects intuitively can be grouped into the outlier clusters and the outlier factors of each object within the outlier cluster should be different gradually. It is not natural if the outlierness of each object within outlier cluster is similar. This study proposes the new outlier detection method based on the hybrid of the Rough K-Means clustering algorithm and the entropy computation. We introduce the outlier degree measure namely the entropy outlier factor for the cluster based outlier detection. The proposed algorithm sequentially finds the outlier cluster and calculates the outlier factor degree of the objects within outlier cluster. Each object within outlier cluster is evaluated using entropy cluster-based to a whole cluster. The performance of the algorithm has been tested on four UCI benchmark data sets and show outperform especially in detection rate.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Journal of Applied Sciences Engineering and TechnologySame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207