MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613364025 · doi:10.1109/icit.2017.7915506

Proportional data clustering using K-means algorithm: A comparison of different distances

2017· article· en· W2613364025 on OpenAlexafffund
Jai Puneet Singh, Nizar Bouguila

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersMitacsConcordia University
KeywordsCluster analysisSilhouetteInitializationComputer scienceCURE data clustering algorithmDivergence (linguistics)Correlation clusteringMetric (unit)Single-linkage clusteringk-medians clusteringPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceConfusion matrixCanopy clustering algorithmFuzzy clusteringData stream clusteringData miningAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we discuss proportional data clustering. It emerges In many applications such as document clustering and Image classification using bag of visual words approach. When deploying mixture models for clustering, there Is always a problem of initialization, and It Is common to initialize using K-means algorithm. In proposed work, we present K-means clustering approach using different distance metrics. In particular, we propose the consideration of the Altchlson distance. Experimental results are presented using silhouette plots for showing divergence from the center, and confusion matrix Is used to validate our clustering of synthetic and real data sets of Images and texts. The algorithm with Altchlson distance metric results Into lower error rates.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.160
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207