A geometric density-based sample reduction method
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
Analysis of network traffic, financial transactions, and mobile communications are examples of applications where examining entire samples of a large dataset is computationally expensive, and requires significant memory space. A common approach to address this challenge is to reduce the number of s amples without compromising the accuracy of analyzing them. In this paper, we propose a new cluster-based sample reduction method which is unsupervised, geometric, and density-based. The original data is initially divided into clusters, and each cluster is divided into ``portions'' defined as the areas between two concentric circles. Then, using the proposed geometric-based formulas, the selection value of each sample belonging to a specific portion is calculated. Samples are then selected from the original data according to the corresponding calculated selection value. The performance of the proposed method is measured on various datasets and compared with several cluster-based and density-based methods. We conduct various experiments on the NSL-KDD, KDDCup99, and IUSTsip datasets, and evaluate the performance of the proposed method by measuring the cluster validity indices, as well as the accuracy of the classifier applied on the reduced data. We demonstrate that the reduced dataset has similar sample scattering as that of the original dataset. We also demonstrate that, while reducing the sample size of the input dataset in half, the classification accuracy is not reduced significantly, indicating that the proposed method selects the most relevant samples from the original dataset.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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