MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005030534 · doi:10.1080/0308107031000090756

Fuzzy Polynomial Neuron-Based Self-Organizing Neural Networks

2003· article· en· W2005030534 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sung‐Kwun Oh, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of General Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWonkwang University
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceFuzzy logicProcess (computing)Neuro-fuzzyPolynomialArtificial intelligenceNetwork topologyLayer (electronics)Topology (electrical circuits)Fuzzy control systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new category of neurofuzzy networks—self-organizing neural networks (SONN) with fuzzy polynomial neurons (FPNs) and discuss a comprehensive design methodology supporting their development. Two kinds of SONN architectures, namely a basic SONN and a modified SONN architecture are discussed. Each of them comes with two topologies such as a generic and advanced type. Especially in the advanced type, the number of nodes in each layer of the SONN architecture can be modified with new nodes added, if necessary. SONN dwells on the ideas of fuzzy rule-based computing and neural networks. The architecture of the SONN is not fixed in advance as it usually takes place in the case of conventional neural networks, but becomes organized dynamically through a growth process. Simulation involves a series of synthetic as well as real-world data used across various neurofuzzy systems. A comparative analysis shows that the proposed SONN are models exhibiting higher accuracy than some other fuzzy models.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations55
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of General SystemsSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207