MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977122250 · doi:10.5539/cis.v3n1p152

A Knowledge Innovation Algorithm Based on Granularity

2010· article· en· W1977122250 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yan Tai-shan

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGranularityComputer scienceKnowledge baseConsistency (knowledge bases)sortGranular computingKnowledge spacePartition (number theory)Rough setAlgorithmData miningTheoretical computer scienceMeasure (data warehouse)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsKnowledge managementInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structure of Human knowledge is regarded as granule state by rough sets theory. Granularity is used to denote this structure of knowledge. Knowledge itself evolves ceaselessly as creatures. Knowledge innovation is an important step of knowledge evolution course. Based on knowledge granularity, a knowledge innovation method was proposed in this paper. The main idea of this method is to constitute the partition granularity of knowledge base space ceaselessly depend on the measure consistency of attribute, till the sort of every granules in the granularity is only one. There is only one computation namely the measure consistency of attribute in the algorithm, so the numerical calculation work is little, the time complexity is low, and the algorithm is feasible absolutely. Experiments were taken on the imperfect knowledge base space of day weather classification by this algorithm, its working course was explained. The successful results show that this algorithm is correct and valid.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreMethods

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 topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207