Q-Eclat: Vertical Mining of Interesting Quantitative Patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frequent pattern mining is a popular technique in big data mining and analytics. It discovers frequently occurring sets of items (e.g., popular merchandise items, frequently co-occurring events) from big data found in numerous database engineered applications. These frequent patterns can be discovered horizontally by transaction-centric mining algorithms or vertically by item-centric mining algorithms. Regardless of their mining direction (horizontal or vertical), traditional frequent pattern mining algorithms aim to discover Boolean frequent patterns in the sense that patterns capture the presence (or absence) of items within the discovered patterns. However, there are many real-life situations, in which quantities of items within the patterns are important. For example, the quantity of items may also affect profits of selling the items within the discovered patterns. Hence, in this paper, we present an algorithm for vertical mining of interesting quantitative frequent patterns. This Q-Eclat algorithm first represents the big data as a collection of equivalence classes according to their prefix item labels. Each domain item is represented by one of these classes. Their corresponding item-centric sets capture (a) IDs of transactions containing the item, as well as (b) the quantity of that item in each transaction. With this representation, our algorithm then vertically mines quantitative frequent patterns. When compared the existing MQA-M algorithm (which was built for quantitative horizontal frequent pattern mining), evaluation results show that our quantitative vertical Q-Eclat algorithm takes shorter runtime to mine quantitative frequent 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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".