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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce and study a new concept of fuzzy computing units. This construct is is aimed at coping with "negative" (inhibitory) information and accommodating it in the language of fuzzy sets. The essential concept developed in this study deals with computing units exploiting the concept of balanced fuzzy sets. We recall how the membership notion of fuzzy sets can be extended to the [-1,1] range giving rise to balanced fuzzy sets and then summarize properties of augmented (extended) logic operations for these constructs. We show that this idea is particularly appealing in neurocomputing as the "negative" information captured through balanced fuzzy sets exhibits a straightforward correspondence with inhibitory processing mechanisms encountered in neural networks. This gives rise to interesting properties of balanced computing units when compared with fuzzy and logic neurons developed on the basis of classical logic and classical fuzzy sets. Illustrative examples concerning topologies and properties and learning of balanced fuzzy computing units are included. A number of illustrative examples concerning topologies, properties and learning of balanced fuzzy fuzzy computing units are included.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it