MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405653065 · doi:10.5539/cis.v18n1p1

Betweenness-based Ranking of Edges using the Principal Components of the Complements of Local Clustering Coefficient and Neighborhood Overlap

2024· article· en· W4405653065 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Systems and Technology Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceBetweenness centralityRanking (information retrieval)Clustering coefficientCluster analysisPrincipal component analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Data miningPrincipal (computer security)Artificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edge betweenness centrality (EBWC) is a computationally-heavy metric used to quantify the contribution of edges for communicating on shortest paths between any two vertices in a network. In this paper, we explore the use of metrics such as the local clustering coefficient (LCC) of a node and the neighborhood overlap (NOVER) scores of the edges as the basis to quantify the contribution of edges for communicating on shortest paths. As vertices with lower LCC and edges with lower NOVER are expected to be unused by their neighbors (and hence unused by any other node in the network as well) and vice-versa for communicating on shortest paths, we propose to develop a principal components analysis (PCA)-based composite betweenness scores for the edges (referred to as PCA_EBW) computed on the basis of a dataset that includes the LCC' (1-LCC) values for the end vertices and the NOVER' (1-NOVER) scores for the edges. When applied over a diverse collection of real-world networks, we notice a moderate-strong Spearman's rank-based correlation between the PCA-EBW scores for the edges and their EBWC values.

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 score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.228 · 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