MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055015168 · doi:10.1049/ip-cta:20010677

Identification of fuzzy models with the aid of evolutionary data granulation

2001· article· en· W2055015168 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEE Proceedings - Control Theory and Applications · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData miningFuzzy logicWeightingIdentification (biology)DefuzzificationComputer scienceMathematicsParametric statisticsCluster analysisGenetic algorithmMembership functionGranularityMathematical optimizationFuzzy numberFuzzy setArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identification of fuzzy rule-based systems is considered. By their nature, these fuzzy models are geared toward capturing relationships between information granules — fuzzy sets. The level of granularity of fuzzy sets helps establish a required level of detail that is of interest in the given modelling environment. The form of the information granules themselves (in particular their distribution and type of membership functions) becomes an important design feature of the fuzzy model, contributing to its structural as well as parametric optimisation. This, in turn, calls for a comprehensive and efficient framework of information (data) granulation, and the one introduced in the study involves a hard C-means (HCM) clustering method and genetic algorithms (GAs). HCM produces an initial collection of information granules (clusters) that are afterwards refined in a parametric way with the aid of a genetic algorithm. The rules of the fuzzy model assume the form `if x1 is A and x2 is B and · · · and xn is W then y=phis(x1 , x2 ,…, xn , param) and come in two forms: a simplified one that involves conclusions that are fixed numeric values (that is, phis is a constant function), and a linear one where the conclusion part (phis) is viewed as a linear function of inputs. The parameters of the rules are optimised through a standard method of linear regression (least square error method). An aggregate objective function with weighting factor used in this study helps maintain a balance between the performance of the model for training and testing data. The proposed identification framework is illustrated with the use of two representative numerical examples.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.212 · 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