MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035362865 · doi:10.1142/s2196888820500207

New Descriptors of Textual Records: Getting Help from Frequent Itemsets

2020· article· en· W3035362865 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

VenueVietnam Journal of Computer Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisHierarchical clusteringData miningMedoidKeyword extractionInformation retrievalSet (abstract data type)Similarity (geometry)Process (computing)Raw dataDocument clusteringAssociation rule learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of numerical data, whether structured, semi-structured, or raw, is of paramount importance in many sectors of economic, scientific, or simply social activity. The process of extraction of association rules is based on the lexical quality of the text and on the minimum support set by the user. In this paper, we implemented a platform named “IDETEX” capable of extracting itemsets from textual data and using it for the experimentation in different types of clustering methods, such as [Formula: see text]-Medoids and Hierarchical clustering. The experiments conducted demonstrate the potential of the proposed approach for defining similarity between segments.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0040.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.226 · 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