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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Multidimensional data sets are common in many domains, and dimensionality reduction methods that determine a lower dimensional embedding are widely used for visualizing such data sets. This paper presents a novel method to project data onto a lower dimensional space by taking into account the order statistics of the individual data points, which are quantified by their depth or centrality in the overall set. Thus, in addition to conveying relative distances in the data, the proposed method also preserves the order statistics, which are often lost or misrepresented by existing visualization methods. The proposed method entails a modification of the optimization objective of conventional multidimensional scaling (MDS) by introducing a term that penalizes discrepancies between centrality structures in the original space and the embedding. We also introduce two strategies for visualizing lower dimensional embeddings of multidimensional data that takes advantage of the coherent representation of centrality provided by the proposed projection method. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our visualization with comparisons on different kinds of multidimensional data, including categorical and multimodal, from a variety of domains such as botany and health care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it