Model-based clustering via skewed matrix-variate cluster-weighted models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cluster-weighted models (CWMs) extend finite mixtures of regressions (FMRs) in order to allow the distribution of covariates to contribute to the clustering process. In this article, we introduce 24 matrix-variate CWMs which are obtained by allowing both the responses and covariates in each cluster to be modelled by one of four existing skewed matrix-variate distributions or the matrix-variate normal distribution. Endowed with greater flexibility, our matrix-variate CWMs are able to handle this kind of data in a more suitable manner. As a by-product, the four skewed matrix-variate FMRs are also introduced. Maximum likelihood parameter estimates are derived using an expectation-conditional maximization algorithm. Parameter recovery, classification assessment, and the capability of the Bayesian information criterion to detect the underlying groups are investigated using simulated data. Lastly, our matrix-variate CWMs, along with the matrix-variate normal CWM and matrix-variate FMRs, are applied to two real datasets for illustrative purposes.
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 | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".