MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1962722916 · doi:10.1109/nafips.1997.624041

Information granularity uncertainty principle: contingency tables and Petri net representations

2002· article· en· W1962722916 on OpenAlexaff
Witold Pedrycz, J. F. Peters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetri netGranularityDynamical systems theoryComputer scienceTheoretical computer scienceConstructiveComponent (thermodynamics)Process architectureSet (abstract data type)Simple (philosophy)Dynamical system (definition)Data miningAlgorithmProcess (computing)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces an information granularity reduction principle in connection with the analysis of the component of uncertainty associated with data. This overall study is illustrated utilizing simple numerical studies dealing with dynamical systems with first order dynamics. Classical and fuzzy Petri models are introduced in the analysis of dynamical systems. The overall study is illustrated utilizing simple numeric studies. The agenda involves a number of essential development issues: (i) providing a constructive way to build Petri nets out of numerical experimental data from dynamical systems, (ii) analyzing the component of uncertainty associated with data and elaborating on its minimization via an optimal quantization of the variables involved in the model of construction, (iii) considering the role of set-theoretic and fuzzy set frameworks in the transformation of numeric quantities into their qualitative (symbolic) counterparts, and (iv) identifying the role of Petri nets in the analysis of dynamical systems.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.250
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207