Top-Down Deep Clustering with Multi-Generator GANs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".