Frequent pattern mining from dense graph streams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As technology advances, streams of data can be produced in many applications such as social networks, sensor networks, bioinformatics, and chemical informatics. These kinds of streaming data share a property in common.namely, they can be modeled in terms of graph-structured data. Here, the data streams generated by graph data sources in these applications are graph streams. To extract implicit, previously unknown, and potentially useful frequent patterns from these streams, efficient data mining algorithms are in demand. Many existing algorithms capture important streaming data and assume that the captured data can fit into main memory. However, problems arise when such an assumption does not hold (e.g., when the available memory is limited). In this paper, we propose a data structure called DSMatrix for capturing important data from the streams.especially, dense graph streams.onto the disk when the memory space is limited. In addition, we also propose two stream mining algorithms that use DSMatrix to mine frequent patterns. The tree-based horizontal mining algorithm applies an e.ective frequency counting approach to avoid recursive construction of sub-trees as in many tree-based mining. The vertical mining algorithm makes good use of the information captured in the DSMatrix for mining.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".