MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Border K-Means Clustering Algorithm for One Dimensional Data

2022· article· en· W4220790596 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceAlgorithmCanopy clustering algorithmCURE data clustering algorithmFocus (optics)Data miningFlexibility (engineering)Data stream clusteringCentroidCluster (spacecraft)Algorithm designCorrelation clusteringArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clustering has been widely used for data pre-processing, mining, and analysis. The k-means clustering algorithm is commonly used because of its simplicity and flexibility to work in many real-life applications and services. Despite being commonly used, the k-means algorithm suffers from non-deterministic results and run times that greatly vary depending on the initial selection of cluster centroids. To improve the k-means algorithm, we present in this paper a border k-means clustering algorithm. It combines concepts from the k-means algorithm with an additional focus on the concepts of the borders dividing clusters. Consequently, the resulting border k-means algorithm leads to deterministic results and a great reduction in run time when compared with the traditional k-means algorithm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.010
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207