MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546235996

Fuzzy Reasoning in JESS: The Fuzzyj Toolkit and Fuzzyjess.

2001· article· en· W1546235996 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

VenueNPARC · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSandia National Laboratories
KeywordsComputer scienceFuzzy logicProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceSoftware engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jess, the Java Expert System Shell, provides a rich and flexible environment for creating rule-based systems. Since it is written in Java it provides platform portability, extensibility and easy integration with other Java code or applications. The rules of Jess allow one to build systems that reason about knowledge that is expressed as facts. However, these facts and rules cannot capture any uncertainty or imprecision that may be present in the domain that is being modelled. This paper describes an extension to Jess that allows some forms of uncertainty to be captured and represented using fuzzy sets and fuzzy reasoning. We describe the NRC FuzzyJ Toolkit, a Java API that allows one to express fuzzy concepts using fuzzy variables, fuzzy values and fuzzy rules. Next, we describe a Java API called FuzzyJess that integrates the FuzzyJ Toolkit and Jess. Finally, we show the modifications that were made to the Jess code to allow this extension (and others with similar requirements) to be added with modest effort and with minimal or no impact as new releases of Jess are delivered.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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