Massive data clustering by multi-scale psychological observations
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 the discovery of latent group structure in data and is a fundamental problem in artificial intelligence, and a vital procedure in data-driven scientific research over all disciplines. Yet, existing methods have various limitations, especially weak cognitive interpretability and poor computational scalability, when it comes to clustering massive datasets that are increasingly available in all domains. Here, by simulating the multi-scale cognitive observation process of humans, we design a scalable algorithm to detect clusters hierarchically hidden in massive datasets. The observation scale changes, following the Weber-Fechner law to capture the gradually emerging meaningful grouping structure. We validated our approach in real datasets with up to a billion records and 2000 dimensions, including taxi trajectories, single-cell gene expressions, face images, computer logs and audios. Our approach outperformed popular methods in usability, efficiency, effectiveness and robustness across different domains.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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