MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383503423 · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2023.3289158

Deep Multirepresentation Learning for Data Clustering

2023· article· en· W4383503423 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammadreza Sadeghi, Narges Armanfard

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceClustering high-dimensional dataArtificial intelligenceEmbeddingAKAPattern recognition (psychology)Benchmark (surveying)Correlation clusteringSubspace topologyCluster (spacecraft)Data miningData pointGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep clustering incorporates embedding into clustering in order to find a lower-dimensional space suitable for clustering tasks. Conventional deep clustering methods aim to obtain a single global embedding subspace (aka latent space) for all the data clusters. In contrast, in this article, we propose a deep multirepresentation learning (DML) framework for data clustering whereby each difficult-to-cluster data group is associated with its own distinct optimized latent space and all the easy-to-cluster data groups are associated with a general common latent space. Autoencoders (AEs) are employed for generating cluster-specific and general latent spaces. To specialize each AE in its associated data cluster(s), we propose a novel and effective loss function which consists of weighted reconstruction and clustering losses of the data points, where higher weights are assigned to the samples more probable to belong to the corresponding cluster(s). Experimental results on benchmark datasets demonstrate that the proposed DML framework and loss function outperform state-of-the-art clustering approaches. In addition, the results show that the DML method significantly outperforms the SOTA on imbalanced datasets as a result of assigning an individual latent space to the difficult clusters.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning SystemsSame topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207