In Search of Effective Granulization with DTRS for Ternary Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decision-Theoretic Rough Set (DTRS) model provides a three-way decision approach to classification problems, which allows a classifier to make a deferment decision on suspicious examples, rather than being forced to make an immediate determination. The deferred cases must be reexamined by collecting further information. Although the formulation of DTRS is intuitively appealing, a fundamental question that remains is how to determine the class of the deferment examples. In this paper, the authors introduce an adaptive learning method that automatically deals with the deferred examples by searching for effective granulization. A decision tree is constructed for classification. At each level, the authors sequentially choose the attributes that provide the most effective granulization. A subtree is added recursively if the conditional probability lies in between of the two given thresholds. A branch reaches its leaf node when the conditional probability is above or equal to the first threshold, or is below or equal to the second threshold, or the granule meets certain conditions. This learning process is illustrated by an example.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".