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
Here, we propose a clustering technique for general clustering problems including those that have non-convex clusters. For a given desired number of clusters $K$, we use three stages to find a clustering. The first stage uses a hybrid clustering technique to produce a series of clusterings of various sizes (randomly selected). They key steps are to find a $K$-means clustering using $K_\ell$ clusters where $K_\ell \gg K$ and then joins these small clusters by using single linkage clustering. The second stage stabilizes the result of stage one by reclustering via the `membership matrix' under Hamming distance to generate a dendrogram. The third stage is to cut the dendrogram to get $K^*$ clusters where $K^* \geq K$ and then prune back to $K$ to give a final clustering. A variant on our technique also gives a reasonable estimate for $K_T$, the true number of clusters. We provide a series of arguments to justify the steps in the stages of our methods and we provide numerous examples involving real and simulated data to compare our technique with other related techniques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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