MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2373927542 · doi:10.1142/s0219622016500267

A Hybrid Artificial Fish Swarm Simulated Annealing Optimization Algorithm for Automatic Identification of Clusters

2016· article· en· W2373927542 on OpenAlexafffund
Si He, Nabil Belacel, Alan Chan, Habib Hamam, Yassine Bouslimani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsCrandall UniversityNational Research Council CanadaUniversité de Moncton
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceSimulated annealingSwarm behaviourFuzzy logicFuzzy clusteringA priori and a posterioriRobustness (evolution)AlgorithmRate of convergenceData miningConvergence (economics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces an alternative fuzzy clustering method that does not require fixing the number of clusters a priori and produce reliable clustering results. This newly proposed method empowers the existing Improved Artificial Fish Swarm algorithm (IAFSA) by the simulated annealing (SA) algorithm. The hybrid approach can prevent IAFSA from unexpected vibration and accelerate convergence rate in the late stage of evolution. Computer simulations are performed to compare this new method with well-known fuzzy clustering algorithms using several synthetic and real-life datasets. Our experimental results show that our newly proposed approach outperforms some other well-known existing fuzzy clustering algorithms in terms of both accuracy and robustness.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision MakingSame topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207