MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385687128 · doi:10.1093/comnet/cnad028

Hypergraph Artificial Benchmark for Community Detection (h–ABCD)

2023· article· en· W4385687128 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Complex Networks · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypergraphBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceCommunity structureGraphGround truthRandom graphAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceDiscrete mathematicsMathematicsCombinatoricsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Artificial Benchmark for Community Detection (ABCD) graph is a recently introduced random graph model with community structure and power-law distribution for both degrees and community sizes. The model generates graphs with similar properties as the well-known Lancichinetti, Fortunato, Radicchi (LFR) one, and its main parameter ξ can be tuned to mimic its counterpart in the LFR model, the mixing parameter μ. In this article, we introduce hypergraph counterpart of the ABCD model, h–ABCD, which also produces random hypergraph with distributions of ground-truth community sizes and degrees following power-law. As in the original ABCD, the new model h–ABCD can produce hypergraphs with various levels of noise. More importantly, the model is flexible and can mimic any desired level of homogeneity of hyperedges that fall into one community. As a result, it can be used as a suitable, synthetic playground for analyzing and tuning hypergraph community detection algorithms. [Received on 22 October 2022; editorial decision on 18 July 2023; accepted on 19 July 2023]

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.262 · 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