RECORD
Creating Compact Regions of Social Determinants of Health
Machine Learning · Submitted 23 Sep 2022
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim The prevailing regionalization method is then compared with unconstrained K-Means clustering on their ability to separate real health data in Virginia and Washington DC.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Regionalization is the act of breaking a dataset into contiguous homogeneous regions that are heterogeneous from each other. Many different algorithms exist for performing regionalization; however, using these algorithms on large real world data sets have only become feasible in terms of compute power in recent years. Very few studies have been done comparing different regionalization methods, and those that do lack analysis in memory, scalability, geographic metrics, and large-scale real-world applications. This study compares state-of-the-art regionalization methods, namely, Agglomerative Clustering, SKATER, REDCAP, AZP, and Max-P-Regions using real world social determinant of health (SDOH) data. The scale of real world SDOH data, up to 1 million data points in this study, not only compares the algorithms over different data sets but provides a stress test for each individual regionalization algorithm, most of which have never been run on such scales previously. We use several new geographic metrics to compare algorithms as well as perform a comparative memory analysis. The prevailing regionalization method is then compared with unconstrained K-Means clustering on their ability to separate real health data in Virginia and Washington DC.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Regionalization is the act of breaking a dataset into contiguous homogeneous regions that are heterogeneous from each other. | background 1.00 | 0.04 | 0.02 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | Many different algorithms exist for performing regionalization; however, using these algorithms on large real world data sets have only become feasible in terms of compute power in recent years. | background 0.97 | 0.05 | 0.02 | asserted 0.99 |
| s2 | Very few studies have been done comparing different regionalization methods, and those that do lack analysis in memory, scalability, geographic metrics, and large-scale real-world applications. | gap 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | This study compares state-of-the-art regionalization methods, namely, Agglomerative Clustering, SKATER, REDCAP, AZP, and Max-P-Regions using real world social determinant of health (SDOH) data. | contribution 0.88 | 0.89 | 0.04 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | The scale of real world SDOH data, up to 1 million data points in this study, not only compares the algorithms over different data sets but provides a stress test for each individual regionalization algorithm, most of which have never been run on such scales previously. | contribution 0.86 | 0.91 | 0.05 | asserted 1.00 |
| s5 | We use several new geographic metrics to compare algorithms as well as perform a comparative memory analysis. | method 0.71 | 0.95 | 0.04 | asserted 0.99 |
| s6 | The prevailing regionalization method is then compared with unconstrained K-Means clustering on their ability to separate real health data in Virginia and Washington DC. | method 0.76 | 0.88 | 0.08 | asserted 0.85 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Regionalization is the act of breaking a dataset into contiguous homogeneous regions that are heterogeneous from each other. Many different algorithms exist for performing regionalization; however, using these algorithms on large real world data sets have only become feasible in terms of compute power in recent years. Very few studies have been done comparing different regionalization methods, and those that do lack analysis in memory, scalability, geographic metrics, and large-scale real-world applications. This study compares state-of-the-art regionalization methods, namely, Agglomerative Clustering, SKATER, REDCAP, AZP, and Max-P-Regions using real world social determinant of health (SDOH) data. The scale of real world SDOH data, up to 1 million data points in this study, not only compares the algorithms over different data sets but provides a stress test for each individual regionalization algorithm, most of which have never been run on such scales previously. We use several new geographic metrics to compare algorithms as well as perform a comparative memory analysis. The prevailing regionalization method is then compared with unconstrained K-Means clustering on their ability to separate real health data in Virginia and Washington DC.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.