Projected Affinity Values for Nyström Spectral Clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In kernel methods, Nyström approximation is a popular way of calculating out-of-sample extensions and can be further applied to large-scale data clustering and classification tasks. Given a new data point, Nyström employs its empirical affinity vector, k, for calculation. This vector is assumed to be a proper measurement of the similarity between the new point and the training set. In this paper, we suggest replacing the affinity vector by its projections on the leading eigenvectors learned from the training set, i.e., using k*=∑i=1ckTuiui instead, where ui is the i-th eigenvector of the training set and c is the number of eigenvectors used, which is typically equal to the number of classes designed by users. Our work is motivated by the constraints that in kernel space, the kernel-mapped new point should (a) also lie on the unit sphere defined by the Gaussian kernel and (b) generate training set affinity values close to k. These two constraints define a Quadratic Optimization Over a Sphere (QOOS) problem. In this paper, we prove that the projection on the leading eigenvectors, rather than the original affinity vector, is the solution to the QOOS problem. The experimental results show that the proposed replacement of k by k* slightly improves the performance of the Nyström approximation. Compared with other affinity matrix modification methods, our k* obtains comparable or higher clustering performance in terms of accuracy and Normalized Mutual Information (NMI).
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".