MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970990147 · doi:10.3233/jifs-231817

A shrinking synchronization clustering algorithm based on a linear weighted Vicsek model

2023· article· en· W2970990147 on OpenAlexaff
Xinquan Chen, Jianbo Ma, Yirou Qiu, Sanming Liu, Xiaofeng Xu, Xianglin Bao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordssyncCluster analysisComputer scienceSynchronization (alternating current)AlgorithmCURE data clustering algorithmCanopy clustering algorithmCorrelation clusteringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of clustering is to identify distributions and patterns within unlabelled datasets. Since the proposal of the original synchronization clustering (SynC) algorithm in 2010, synchronization clustering has become a significant research direction. This paper proposes a shrinking synchronization clustering (SSynC) algorithm utilizing a linear weighted Vicsek model. SSynC algorithm is developed from SynC algorithm and a more effective synchronization clustering (ESynC) algorithm. Through analysis and comparison, we find that SSynC algorithm demonstrates superior synchronization effect compared to SynC algorithm, which is based on an extensive Kuramoto model. Additionally, it exhibits similar effect to ESynC algorithm, based on a linear version of Vicsek model. In the simulations, a comparison is conducted between several synchronization clustering algorithms and classical clustering algorithms. Through experiments using some artificial datasets, eight real datasets and three picture datasets, we observe that compared to SynC algorithm, SSynC algorithm not only achieves a better local synchronization effect but also requires fewer iterations and incurs lower time costs. Furthermore, when compared to ESynC algorithm, SSynC algorithm obtains reduced time costs while achieving nearly the same local synchronization effect and the same number of iterations. Extensive comparison experiments with some class clustering algorithms demonstrate the effectiveness of SSynC algorithm.

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 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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy SystemsSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207