A Visual Approach for Interactive Keyterm-Based Clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The keyterm-based approach is arguably intuitive for users to direct text-clustering processes and adapt results to various applications in text analysis. Its way of markedly influencing the results, for instance, by expressing important terms in relevance order, requires little knowledge of the algorithm and has predictable effect, speeding up the task. This article first presents a text-clustering algorithm that can easily be extended into an interactive algorithm. We evaluate its performance against state-of-the-art clustering algorithms in unsupervised mode. Next, we propose three interactive versions of the algorithm based on keyterm labeling, document labeling, and hybrid labeling. We then demonstrate that keyterm labeling is more effective than document labeling in text clustering. Finally, we propose a visual approach to support the keyterm-based version of the algorithm. Visualizations are provided for the whole collection as well as for detailed views of document and cluster relationships. We show the effectiveness and flexibility of our framework, Vis-Kt , by presenting typical clustering cases on real text document collections. A user study is also reported that reveals overwhelmingly positive acceptance toward keyterm-based clustering.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".