MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344301817 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2015.2513091

Online Feature Selection Based on Fuzzy Clustering and Its Applications

2015· article· en· W2344301817 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Feature selectionArtificial intelligenceData miningFuzzy logicFuzzy clusteringFuzzy setPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningFeature (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fuzzy c-means (FCM) clustering has been successfully applied in various pattern recognition areas. While FCM is gaining attention, an important issue arising from these studies is the need to determine which attributes of the data should be used. Answering this question is difficult, because there is no labeled training data available in clustering to guide the search. We present a feature selection for FCM. The advantage of our method is that it is intuitively appealing, avoiding combinatorial searches, and allowing us to prune the feature set. Our method is also adaptable and can change through complex scenes in an online environment. We do not have to wait until all data have been generated before learning begins. Finally, to estimate the model parameters, the gradient method is adopted to minimize the fuzzy objective function with the Kullback-Leibler divergence information. Numerical experiments are presented to demonstrate the robustness and accuracy of our 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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.252 · 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