MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971394479 · doi:10.1109/codit.2019.8820298

An Improved K-medoids Algorithm Based on Binary Sequences Similarity Measures

2019· article· en· W2971394479 on OpenAlexaff
Fahdah Alalyan, Nuha Zamzami, Manar Amayri, Nizar Bouguila

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText and Document Classification Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceMedoidSimilarity (geometry)Binary numberEuclidean distanceData miningk-medoidsBinary dataAlgorithmFuzzy clusteringCURE data clustering algorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays a massive amount of data is generated as the development of technology and services has accelerated. Therefore, the demand for data clustering in order to gain knowledge has increased in many sectors such as medical sciences, risk assessment and product sales. Moreover, binary data has been widely used in various applications including market basket data and text documents. While applying classic widely used k-means method is inappropriate to cluster binary data, this work proposes an improvement of K-medoids algorithm using binary similarity measures instead of Euclidean distance which is generally deployed in clustering algorithms. We have considered two challenging applications, namely; text clustering and binary images categorization to show the merits of the proposed framework.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicText and Document Classification TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207