MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1491079601 · doi:10.3233/fi-2013-917

From Numeric to Granular Description and Interpretation of Information Granules

2013· article· en· W1491079601 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

VenueFundamenta Informaticae · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Research Centre
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Granular computingComputer scienceTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageData miningRough set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fuzzy sets (membership functions) are numeric constructs. In spite of the underlying semantics of fuzzy sets (which is inherently linked with the higher level of abstraction), the membership grades and processing of fuzzy sets themselves emphasize the numeric facets of all pursuits stressing the numeric nature of membership grades and in this way reducing the interpretability and transparency of results. In this study, we advocate an idea of a granular description of membership functions where instead of numeric membership grades, introduced are more interpretable granular descriptors (say, low, high membership, etc.). Granular descriptors are formalized with the aid of various formal schemes available in Granular Computing, especially sets (intervals), fuzzy sets, and shadowed sets. We formulate a problem of a design of granular descriptors as a certain optimization task, elaborate on the solutions and highlight some areas of applications.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

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 communication0.0000.005
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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