Fuzzy C-Means Clustering Algorithm with Multiple Fuzzification Coefficients
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
Clustering is an unsupervised machine learning technique with many practical applications that has gathered extensive research interest. Aside from deterministic or probabilistic techniques, fuzzy C-means clustering (FCM) is also a common clustering technique. Since the advent of the FCM method, many improvements have been made to increase clustering efficiency. These improvements focus on adjusting the membership representation of elements in the clusters, or on fuzzifying and defuzzifying techniques, as well as the distance function between elements. This study proposes a novel fuzzy clustering algorithm using multiple different fuzzification coefficients depending on the characteristics of each data sample. The proposed fuzzy clustering method has similar calculation steps to FCM with some modifications. The formulas are derived to ensure convergence. The main contribution of this approach is the utilization of multiple fuzzification coefficients as opposed to only one coefficient in the original FCM algorithm. The new algorithm is then evaluated with experiments on several common datasets and the results show that the proposed algorithm is more efficient compared to the original FCM as well as other clustering methods.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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