MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974311482 · doi:10.5539/cis.v3n3p122

Comparison of Fuzzy Inference System and Multiple Regression to Predict Synthetic Envelopes Clogging

2010· article· en· W1974311482 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bakhtiar Karimi, Farhad Mirzaei, Mohammad Javad Nahvinia, Behnam Ababaei

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloggingFuzzy inference systemComputer scienceRegressionFuzzy logicDecision treeInterference (communication)Regression analysisEnvelope (radar)Inference systemData miningStatisticsAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemArtificial intelligenceMachine learningFuzzy control systemMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geo-synthetic materials are being used with acceptable performance in soil and water projects worldwide. Geotextiles are one of the categories of geo-synthetics being used in drainage systems. First generation of geotextiles used in the late 1950’s as an alternative for gravel envelopes. In this research two methods (multiple regression and fuzzy interference system) evaluate to predict synthetic envelope clogging. In multiple regression method the correlation coefficients for PP450, PP700 and PP900 are 62.66%, 79.37% and 90.62%, respectively and results of fuzzy interference system and decision tree showed that this method have high potential in comparison with multiple regression and values of total classification accuracy for PP450, PP700 and PP900 are 98.6%, 97.3% and 98% respectively. Then final results of this research showed fuzzy interference systems by using decision tree have high potential to predict clogging in envelops.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207