Graph and Sparse-Based Robust Nonnegative Block Value Decomposition for Clustering
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
In this paper, we first investigate the nonnegative block value decomposition (NBVD) approach through graph-based representation for clustering called G-NBVD. Then, we propose our three-step graph and sparse-based robust NBVD (GSR-NBVD) via robust NBVD (R-NBVD) framework. The robustness to outliers is obtained by converting the Frobenius norm of error function to the <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\ell _{2,1}$</tex-math></inline-formula> -norm for NBVD structure that compensates the effect of samples that are not conforming to NBVD. To exploit the connection between the learning matrix and its corresponding coefficients through sparse representation, we enforce the sparse constraints on the middle matrix in the R-NBVD framework called SR-NBVD. To enhance the geometrical information from data space to the new space, we add a term to our objective minimization function through a regularized graph representation compact form called GSR-NBVD. Then, we prove the convergence of our proposed methods and show a visualization of the effectiveness of G-NBVD and GSR-NBVD step-by-step. Finally, we evaluate our proposed clustering methods over different kinds of data sets. The experimental results confirm that our methods outperforms several state-of-the-art methods through different metrics.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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