MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385232475 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2023.3298629

Knowledge-Induced Multiple Kernel Fuzzy Clustering

2023· article· en· W4385232475 on OpenAlexaff
Yiming Tang, Zhifu Pan, Xianghui Hu, Witold Pedrycz, Renhao Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCluster analysisFuzzy clusteringComputer scienceData miningArtificial intelligenceFuzzy logicKnowledge extractionKernel (algebra)Domain knowledgeCorrelation clusteringData stream clusteringPattern recognition (psychology)CURE data clustering algorithmMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The introduction of domain knowledge opens new horizons to fuzzy clustering. Then knowledge-driven and data-driven fuzzy clustering methods come into being. To address the challenges of inadequate extraction mechanism and imperfect fusion mode in such class of methods, we propose the Knowledge-induced Multiple Kernel Fuzzy Clustering (KMKFC) algorithm. First, to extract knowledge points better, the Relative Density-based Knowledge Extraction (RDKE) method is proposed to extract high-density knowledge points close to cluster centers of real data structure, and provide initialized cluster centers. Moreover, the multiple kernel mechanism is introduced to improve the adaptability of clustering algorithm and map data to high-dimensional space, so as to better discover the differences between the data and obtain superior clustering results. Second, knowledge points generated by RDKE are integrated into KMKFC through a knowledge-influence matrix to guide the iterative process of KMKFC. Third, we also provide a strategy of automatically obtaining knowledge points, and thus propose the RDKE with Automatic knowledge acquisition (RDKE-A) method and the corresponding KMKFC-A algorithm. Then we prove the convergence of KMKFC and KMKFC-A. Finally, experimental studies demonstrate that the KMKFC and KMKFC-A algorithms perform better than thirteen comparison algorithms with regard to four evaluation indexes and the convergence speed.

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)0.007
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations59
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207