MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973213711 · doi:10.4018/jssci.2012100105

Formal Rules for Fuzzy Causal Analyses and Fuzzy Inferences

2012· article· en· W1973213711 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

VenueInternational Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFuzzy cognitive mapArtificial intelligenceComputational intelligenceFuzzy logicDeductive reasoningSemantics (computer science)InferenceFuzzy setFuzzy set operationsTheoretical computer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Causal inference is one of the central capabilities of the natural intelligence that plays a crucial role in thinking, perception, and problem solving. Fuzzy inferences are an extended form of formal inferences that provide a denotational mathematical means for rigorously dealing with degrees of matters, uncertainties, and vague semantics of linguistic variables, as well as for rational reasoning the semantics of fuzzy causalities. This paper presents a set of formal rules for causal analyses and fuzzy inferences such as those of deductive, inductive, abductive, and analogical inferences. Rules and methodologies for each of the fuzzy inferences are formally modeled and illustrated with real-world examples and cases of applications. The formalization of fuzzy inference methodologies enables machines to mimic complex human reasoning mechanisms in cognitive informatics, cognitive computing, soft computing, abstract intelligence, and computational intelligence.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.303 · 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