MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092253034 · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2020.3027761

Clustering Analysis via Deep Generative Models With Mixture Models

2020· article· en· W3092253034 on OpenAlexaff
Lin Yang, Wentao Fan, Nizar Bouguila

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersHuaqiao UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Fujian ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCluster analysisAutoencoderComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGenerative grammarMixture modelGenerative modelPattern recognition (psychology)OutlierCorrelation clusteringMachine learningDeep learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clustering is a fundamental problem that frequently arises in many fields, such as pattern recognition, data mining, and machine learning. Although various clustering algorithms have been developed in the past, traditional clustering algorithms with shallow structures cannot excavate the interdependence of complex data features in latent space. Recently, deep generative models, such as autoencoder (AE), variational AE (VAE), and generative adversarial network (GAN), have achieved remarkable success in many unsupervised applications thanks to their capabilities for learning promising latent representations from original data. In this work, first we propose a novel clustering approach based on both Wasserstein GAN with gradient penalty (WGAN-GP) and VAE with a Gaussian mixture prior. By combining the WGAN-GP with VAE, the generator of WGAN-GP is formulated by drawing samples from the probabilistic decoder of VAE. Moreover, to provide more robust clustering and generation performance when outliers are encountered in data, a variant of the proposed deep generative model is developed based on a Student's-t mixture prior. The effectiveness of our deep generative models is validated though experiments on both clustering analysis and samples generation. Through the comparison with other state-of-art clustering approaches based on deep generative models, the proposed approach can provide more stable training of the model, improve the accuracy of clustering, and generate realistic samples.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning SystemsSame topicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisFrench-language works237,207