MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011819927 · doi:10.1142/s0218488520500087

Estimating and Controlling Overlap in Gaussian Mixtures for Clustering Methods Evaluation

2020· article· en· W3011819927 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsThales (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceData miningMixture modelSet (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceData setMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ad hoc nature of the clustering methods makes simulated data paramount in assessing the performance of clustering methods. Real datasets could be used in the evaluation of clustering methods with the major drawback of missing the assessment of many test scenarios. In this paper, we propose a formal quantification of component overlap. This quantification is derived from a set of theorems which allow us to derive an automatic method for artificial data generation. We also derive a method to estimate parameters of existing models and to evaluate the results of other approaches. Automatic estimation of the overlap rate can also be used as an unsupervised learning approach in data mining to determine the parameters of mixture models from actual observations.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.345 · 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