Set2Box: Similarity Preserving Representation Learning for Sets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sets have been used for modeling various types of objects, and measuring similarity between them has been a key building block of a wide range of applications. However, as sets have grown in numbers and sizes, the computational cost and storage required for set similarity computation have become substantial. In this work, we propose SET2Box, which represents sets as boxes to precisely capture overlaps of sets and thus accurately estimate various similarity measures. Additionally, based on the proposed box quantization scheme, we design SET2Box+, which yields more concise but more accurate box representations of sets. Through extensive experiments on 8 real-world datasets, we show that, compared to baseline approaches, SET2Box+is (a) Accurate: achieving up to $40.8\times$ smaller estimation error while requiring 60% fewer bits to encode sets, (b) Concise: yielding up to $96.8\times$ more concise representations with similar estimation error, and (c) Versatile: enabling the estimation of four set-similarity measures from a single representation of each set. For reproducibility, the source code and datasets used in the paper are available at https://github.com/geon0325/Set2Box.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".