MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052138683 · doi:10.1142/s0218488502001478

HYBRID FUZZY POLYNOMIAL NEURAL NETWORKS

2002· article· en· W2052138683 on OpenAlexaff
Sung‐Kwun Oh, Dong-Won Kim, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolynomialArtificial neural networkMathematicsNeuro-fuzzyComputer scienceQuadratic functionFuzzy logicFuzzy numberAlgorithmQuadratic equationFuzzy control systemArtificial intelligenceFuzzy setMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a hybrid architecture based on a combination of fuzzy systems and polynomial neural networks. The resulting Hybrid Fuzzy Polynomial Neural Networks (HFPNN) dwells on the ideas of fuzzy rule-based computing and polynomial neural networks. The structure of the network comprises of fuzzy polynomial neurons (FPNs) forming the nodes of the first (input) layer of the HFPNN and polynomial neurons (PNs) that are located in the consecutive layers of the network. In the FPN (that forms a fuzzy inference system), the generic rules assume the form "if A then y = P(x) " where A is fuzzy relation in the condition space while P(x) is a polynomial standing in the conclusion part of the rule. The conclusion part of the rules, especially the regression polynomial uses several types of high-order polynomials such as constant, linear, quadratic, and modified quadratic. As the premise part of the rules, both triangular and Gaussian-like membership functions are considered. Each PN of the network realizes a polynomial type of partial description (PD) of the mapping between input and out variables. HFPNN is a flexible neural architecture whose structure is based on the Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) and developed through learning. In particular, the number of layers of the PNN is not fixed in advance but is generated in a dynamic way. The experimental part of the study involves two representative numerical examples such as chaotic time series and Box-Jenkins gas furnace data.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations30
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based SystemsSame topicFuzzy Logic and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207