MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115813140 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.246815

Rough Set Theory based Neural Network Architecture

2006· article· en· W2115813140 on OpenAlex
S. Chandana, René V. Mayorga

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

VenueThe 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceBoundary (topology)BackpropagationRough setConvergence (economics)ComputationProcess (computing)Set (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceDivision (mathematics)Network architecturePattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a novel method of combining rough concepts with neural computation. The proposed new rough neuron consists of, one lower bound neuron and another boundary neuron. The combination is designed in such a way that the boundary neuron deals only with the random and unpredictable part of the applied signal. Such architecture effectively prunes the search space for the respective constituent neurons based on the certain and uncertain behaviors. This division results in an improved rate of error convergence in the back propagation of the neural network along with an improved parameter approximation during the network learning process. Preliminary structures of the rough neural network along with some testing results have been presented. Further, performance comparisons with some of the prevalent designs have been done.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.214 · 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