Sliding window based weighted periodic pattern mining over time series data
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
Sliding windows have been crucial in mining time series. Many existing studies focus on reconstruction of the underlying structure (e.g., suffix tree) for each new window. However, when the window size is large or when the window slides frequently, reconstruction may perform poorly. In this paper, we propose a solution that dynamically updates the structure (rather than reconstruction for each modification or sliding). Moreover, many existing studies rely on the weight of maximum weighted item in the database to avoid testing unnecessary patterns when mining weighted periodic patterns from time series, but it may still require lots of weight checking to determine whether a pattern is a candidate. In this paper, we also propose an additional solution to address this problem by discarding unimportant patterns beforehand so as to speed up the candidate generation process. Evaluation results on real-life datasets show the effectiveness of our two solutions in handling sliding window and pruning redundant candidate patterns.
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 | 0.002 | 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