Semisupervised Clustering by Iterative Partition and Regression with Neuroscience Applications
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
Regression clustering is a mixture of unsupervised and supervised statistical learning and data mining method which is found in a wide range of applications including artificial intelligence and neuroscience. It performs unsupervised learning when it clusters the data according to their respective unobserved regression hyperplanes. The method also performs supervised learning when it fits regression hyperplanes to the corresponding data clusters. Applying regression clustering in practice requires means of determining the underlying number of clusters in the data, finding the cluster label of each data point, and estimating the regression coefficients of the model. In this paper, we review the estimation and selection issues in regression clustering with regard to the least squares and robust statistical methods. We also provide a model selection based technique to determine the number of regression clusters underlying the data. We further develop a computing procedure for regression clustering estimation and selection. Finally, simulation studies are presented for assessing the procedure, together with analyzing a real data set on RGB cell marking in neuroscience to illustrate and interpret the method.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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