MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283800850 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v36i7.20745

Top-Down Deep Clustering with Multi-Generator GANs

2022· article· en· W4283800850 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
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisGenerator (circuit theory)Artificial intelligenceData miningHierarchical clusteringEmbeddingClassifier (UML)Brown clusteringSpectral clusteringHierarchyPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningFuzzy clusteringCanopy clustering algorithmPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep clustering (DC) leverages the representation power of deep architectures to learn embedding spaces that are optimal for cluster analysis. This approach filters out low-level information irrelevant for clustering and has proven remarkably successful for high dimensional data spaces. Some DC methods employ Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), motivated by the powerful latent representations these models are able to learn implicitly. In this work, we propose HC-MGAN, a new technique based on GANs with multiple generators (MGANs), which have not been explored for clustering. Our method is inspired by the observation that each generator of a MGAN tends to generate data that correlates with a sub-region of the real data distribution. We use this clustered generation to train a classifier for inferring from which generator a given image came from, thus providing a semantically meaningful clustering for the real distribution. Additionally, we design our method so that it is performed in a top-down hierarchical clustering tree, thus proposing the first hierarchical DC method, to the best of our knowledge. We conduct several experiments to evaluate the proposed method against recent DC methods, obtaining competitive results. Last, we perform an exploratory analysis of the hierarchical clustering tree that highlights how accurately it organizes the data in a hierarchy of semantically coherent patterns.

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 score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.197 · 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