A <i>Group</i>-Based Distance Learning Method for Semisupervised Fuzzy Clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning a proper distance for clustering from prior knowledge falls into the realm of semisupervised fuzzy clustering. Although most existing learning methods take prior knowledge (e.g., pairwise constraints) into account, they pay little attention to local knowledge of data, which, however, can be utilized to optimize the distance. In this article, we propose a novel distance learning method, which learns from the Group-level information, for semisupervised fuzzing clustering. We first present a new format of constraint information, called Group-level constraints, by elevating the pairwise constraints (must-links and cannot-links) from point level to Group level. The Groups, generated around data points contained in the pairwise constraints, carry not only the local information of data (the relation between close data points) but also more background information under some given limited prior knowledge. Then, we propose a novel method to learn a distance by using the Group-level constraints, namely, Group-based distance learning, in order to optimize the performance of fuzzy clustering. The distance learning process aims to pull must-link Groups as close as possible while pushing cannot-link Groups as far as possible. We formulate the learning process with the weights of constraints by invoking some linear and nonlinear transformations. The linear Group-based distance learning method is realized by means of semidefinite programming, and the nonlinear learning method is realized by using the neural network, which can explicitly provide nonlinear mappings. Experimental results based on both synthetic and real-world datasets show that the proposed methods yield much better performance compared to other distance learning methods using pairwise constraints.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".