Performance Evaluation of Missing-Value Imputation Clustering Based on a Multivariate Gaussian Mixture Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is challenging to deal with mixture models when missing values occur in clustering datasets. METHODS AND RESULTS: We propose a dynamic clustering algorithm based on a multivariate Gaussian mixture model that efficiently imputes missing values to generate a "pseudo-complete" dataset. Parameters from different clusters and missing values are estimated according to the maximum likelihood implemented with an expectation-maximization algorithm, and multivariate individuals are clustered with Bayesian posterior probability. A simulation showed that our proposed method has a fast convergence speed and it accurately estimates missing values. Our proposed algorithm was further validated with Fisher's Iris dataset, the Yeast Cell-cycle Gene-expression dataset, and the CIFAR-10 images dataset. The results indicate that our algorithm offers highly accurate clustering, comparable to that using a complete dataset without missing values. Furthermore, our algorithm resulted in a lower misjudgment rate than both clustering algorithms with missing data deleted and with missing-value imputation by mean replacement. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that our missing-value imputation clustering algorithm is feasible and superior to both of these other clustering algorithms in certain situations.
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 | 0.021 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".