MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of a Novel Fuzzy Pattern Mining Algorithm for Sequence Data

2024· article· en· W4401879325 on OpenAlexaff
Thimani Ranathungage, Sulalitha Bowala, Md Erfanul Hoque, A. Thavaneswaran, Ruppa K. Thulasiram

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSequence (biology)Sequential Pattern MiningData miningFuzzy logicAlgorithmArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many Markov chains that arise in applications (health, finance, etc.), state spaces are huge, and existing matrix methods may not be practical or even not possible to implement. In the literature, the expected waiting time for Markov chain (with a smaller number of states) generated patterns are obtained by finding an appropriate pattern matrix and solving a set of linear equations. In this paper, a fuzzy transition probability (TP) matrix is introduced, and a data-driven fuzzy pattern mining algorithm is proposed for sequence data of any length. The proposed algorithm, which avoids the inversion of the pattern matrix, is applicable to Markov chains with huge state spaces. The proposed algorithm studies two examples involving DNA sequence data with 3954 base pairs and patterns generated by the log-returns of the stocks/cryptocurrencies. Expected weighting times are compared with the traditional matrix approach. Incorporating stochastic variation in the TP estimates through fuzzy matrices, the new approach provides an alternative path to produce <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$\alpha$</tex>-cuts for TP matrices. The main contribution of this paper is to fit an appropriate MC model to a given sequence data and use the proposed fuzzy pattern mining algorithm to obtain resilient probabilistic forecasts and expected waiting time to reach patterns of interest.

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 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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207