Comparative Analysis of Artificial Neural Networks and Neuro-Fuzzy Models for Multicriteria Demand Forecasting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An organization has to make the right decisions in time depending on demand information to enhance the commercial competitive advantage in a constantly fluctuating business environment. Therefore, estimating the demand quantity for the next period most likely appears to be crucial. The objective of the paper is to propose a new forecasting mechanism which is modeled by artificial intelligence approaches including the comparison of both artificial neural networks (ANN) and adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system (FIS) techniques to manage the fuzzy demand with incomplete information. Artificial neural networks has been applied as it is capable to model complex, nonlinear processes without having to assume the form of the relationship between input and output variables. Neuro-fuzzy systems also utilized to harness the power of the fuzzy logic and ANNs through utilizing the mathematical properties of ANNs in tuning rule-based fuzzy systems that approximate the way human’s process information. The effectiveness of the proposed approach to the demand forecasting issue is demonstrated for a 20/25 MVA Distribution Transformer from Energypac Engineering Limited (EEL), a leading power engineering company of Bangladesh.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".