MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982098246 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2006.889967

The Development of Incremental Models

2007· article· en· W1982098246 on OpenAlexaff
Witold Pedrycz, Keun-Chang Kwak

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData miningFuzzy logicConstruct (python library)Context (archaeology)Cluster analysisGranularityArtificial intelligenceData modelingDevelopment (topology)Theoretical computer scienceMachine learningMathematicsDatabaseProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we introduce and discuss a concept of an incremental granular model. In contrast to typical rule-based systems encountered in fuzzy modeling, the underlying principle exploited here is to consider a two-phase development of fuzzy models. First, we build a standard regression model which could be treated as a preliminary construct capturing the linear part of the data and in this way forming a backbone of the entire construct. Next, all modeling discrepancies are compensated by a collection of rules that become attached to the regions of the input space where the error is localized. The incremental model is constructed by building a collection of information granules through some specialized fuzzy clustering, called context-based (conditional) fuzzy C-means that is guided by the distribution of error of the linear part of the model. The architecture of the model is discussed along with the major algorithmic phases of its development. In particular, the issue of granularity of fuzzy sets of context and induced clusters is discussedvis-a-visthe performance of the model. Numeric studies concern some low-dimensional synthetic data and several datasets coming from the machine learning repository.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 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

Citations80
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy SystemsSame topicFuzzy Logic and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207