MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313495625 · doi:10.31449/inf.v46i4.3476

OMCOKE: A Machine Learning Outlier-based Overlapping Clustering Technique for Multi-Label Data Analysis

2022· article· en· W4313495625 on OpenAlexaff
Said Baadel, Fadi Thabtah, Joan Lu, Saida Harguem

Bibliographic record

VenueInformatica · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText and Document Classification Technologies
Canadian institutionsFanshawe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisOutlierComputer scienceAnomaly detectionData miningArtificial intelligenceUnsupervised learningCluster (spacecraft)CURE data clustering algorithmMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Correlation clustering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clustering is one of the challenging machine learning techniques due to its unsupervised learning nature. While many clustering algorithms constrain objects to single clusters, K-means overlapping partitioning clustering methods assign objects to multiple clusters by relaxing the constraints and allowing objects to belong to more than one cluster to better fit hidden structures in the data. However, when datasets contain outliers, they can significantly influence the mean distance of the data objects to their respective clusters, which is a drawback. Therefore, most researchers address this problem by simply removing the outliers. This can be problematic especially in applications such as fraud detection or cybersecurity attacks risk analysis. In this study, an alternative solution to this problem is proposed that captures outliers and stores them on-the-fly within a new cluster, instead of discarding. The new algorithm is named Outlier-based Multi-Cluster Overlapping K-Means Extension (OMCOKE). Empirical results on real-life multi-label datasets were derived to compare OMCOKE’s performance with other common overlapping clustering techniques. The results show that OMCOKE produced a better precision rate compared to the considered clustering algorithms. This method can benefit various stakeholders as these outliers could have real-life applications in cybersecurity, fraud detection, and the anti-phishing of websites.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformaticaSame topicText and Document Classification TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207