An efficient approach for mining weighted frequent patterns with dynamic weights.
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
Weighted frequent pattern (WFP) mining is considered to be more effective than traditional frequent pattern mining because of its consideration of different semantic significance (weights) of items. However, most existing WFP algorithms assume a static weight for each item, which may not be realistically hold in many real-life applications. In this paper, we consider the concept of a dynamic weight for each item and address the situations where the weights of an item can be changed dynamically. We propose a novel tree structure called compact pattern tree for dynamic weights (CPTDW) to mine frequent patterns from dynamic weighted item containing databases. The CPTDW-tree leads to the concept of dynamic tree restructuring to produce a frequency-descending tree structure at runtime. CPTDW also ensures that no non-candidate item can appear before candidate items in any branch of the tree, and thus speeds up the construction time for prefix tree and its conditional tree during the mining process. Furthermore, as it requires only one database scan, it can be applicable to interactive, incremental, and/or stream data mining. Evaluation results show that our proposed tree structure and the mining algorithm outperforms previous methods for dynamic weighted frequent pattern mining.
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 | 0.001 | 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