MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785593625 · doi:10.1109/ssci.2017.8285208

Particle swarm optimization for large-scale clustering on apache spark

2017· article· en· W2785593625 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSPARK (programming language)Cluster analysisComputer scienceParticle swarm optimizationBig dataData miningCanopy clustering algorithmCURE data clustering algorithmCorrelation clusteringAlgorithmMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a particle swarm optimization (PSO) clustering algorithm implemented in Apache Spark to achieve parallel big data clustering. Apache Spark is an in-memory big data analytics framework which uses parallel distributed processing to analyze large amount of data faster than most other existing data analytic tools. Spark's library of data analytic functions does not include the PSO algorithm. PSO is an evolutionary computing technique that has shown to produce more compact clusters than other partitional clustering techniques for a wide range of data. In addition PSO is a paralellizable and customizable algorithm well suited for multi-objective clustering problems. In this paper we present our implementation of a hybrid K-Means PSO (KMPSO) clustering algorithm in Apache Spark and demonstrate the performance gained in Spark by comparing our implementation with an implementation of KMPSO in MATLAB. We demonstrate that KMPSO can produce better clustering results than Spark's built-in clustering algorithms, and that Apache Spark enables efficient scaling of resources to handle large and complex workloads.

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)0.001
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.279 · 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