Frequent itemset mining optimization and computational complexity analysis based on improved Apriori algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Apriori algorithm is a classic frequent itemset mining algorithm, but it has the problems of more time consumed by the self-connection process and high overhead of conversion between memories. In order to improve the frequent itemset mining effect of Apriori algorithm, this paper improves the existing adaptive genetic algorithm by using the average population fitness and fitness value discretization, and improves the Apriori algorithm by using the optimized genetic algorithm, so as to solve the strong association rules. Compared with the traditional Apriori algorithm, the algorithm in this paper has less time overhead and improves 2.4%, 2.4%, and 2.7% on average in recall, accuracy, and F1 value. On the Accidents and Retail datasets, the improved Apriori algorithm is faster than the NSFI algorithm by 6.12% and 13.52% on average, reducing the computational complexity. Using the improved algorithm to analyze the characteristics of cross-provincial migrants, it is found that the migrant population is younger in age, with lower education level, mostly of agricultural household registration, and mostly of Han nationality, which verifies the practical application value of the improved algorithm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".