MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983614277 · doi:10.1142/s0218488509006133

FUZZY LINGUISTIC MODELING OF EASE OF DOING BUSINESS INDICATORS

2009· article· en· W1983614277 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)UsabilityFuzzy logicComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Fuzzy setWork (physics)Commercial bankManagement scienceOperations researchEconometricsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBusinessMathematicsEngineeringFinanceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ease of Doing Business (EDB) indicators are essential to overall understanding and evaluation of national business environment, and strategy formulation for business policy and regulations. The World Bank does an annual study of these indicators for over 170 nations, but there are many complications and uncertainties involved in the work. This paper proposes a new systematic approach that employs fuzzy set theory to generate composite EDB indicators for ranking and classification problems. We implemented this approach and illustrate its steps and procedures. A case study example for Canada is also presented in which EDB indicators are evaluated, linguistically identified, and ranked. This approach demonstrates the ease of using this fuzzy application, and its potential benefits for future research. We also compare ranking results, obtained from our proposed approach, with the World Bank's results.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.316 · 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