MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205661532 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.1716671

Refining Spherical K-Means for Clustering Documents

2006· article· en· W4205661532 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvexityCluster analysisMathematical optimizationConstraint (computer-aided design)Set (abstract data type)MaximizationMathematicsAlgorithmComputer scienceFunction (biology)Linear programmingOptimization problemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spherical k-means is a popular algorithm for document clustering. However, it may still yield poor performance in some circumstances. In this paper, we consider a discrete optimization model for spherical k-means. By using the convexity of objective function and specific structure of constraint set, we first reformulate the discrete problem as an equivalent convex maximization problem with linear constraints. Then we characterize the local optimality of relaxed problem. Based on the characteristics, we refine the spherical k-means algorithm by alternatively performing spherical k-means and switching data points between clusters. This strategy guarantees that the refined algorithm can always attain a local optimal solution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.258 · 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