MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139565979 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2006.889930

Fuzzy Classification Using Pattern Discovery

2007· article· en· W2139565979 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of GuelphMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceWeightingComputer scienceFuzzy logicDefuzzificationFuzzy setDecision ruleData miningClassifier (UML)Machine learningFuzzy classificationFuzzy ruleMathematicsFuzzy numberPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rule-based classifiers allow rationalization of classifications made. This in turn improves understanding which is essential for effective decision support. As a rule based classifier, the pattern discovery (PD) algorithm functions well in discrete, nominal and continuous data domains. A drawback when using PD as a classifier for decision support is that it has an unbounded decision space that confounds the understanding of the degree of support for a decision. Incorporating PD into a fuzzy inference system (FIS) allows the the degree of support for a decision to be expressed with intuitively understandable terms. In addition, using discrete algorithms in continuous domains can result in reduced accuracy due to quantization. Fuzzification reduces this ldquocost of quantizationrdquo and improves classification performance. In this work, the PD algorithm was used as a source of rules for a series of FISs implemented using different rule weighting and defuzzification schemes, each providing a linguistic basis for rule description and a bounded space for expression of decision support. The output of each FIS consists of a suggested outcome, a strong confidence metric describing suggestions within this space and a linguistic expression of the rules. This constitutes a stronger basis for decision making than that provided by PD alone. A variety of synthetic, continuous class distributions with varying degrees of separation was used to evaluate the performance of fuzzy, PD, back-propagation and Bayesian classifiers. Overall, the accuracy of the fuzzy system was found to be similar, but slightly below, that of the inherently continuous valued classifiers and was somewhat improved with respect to the PD classifiers. For the difficult spiral class distributions studied, the fuzzy classifiers were able to make more classifications than the PD classifiers. The correct classification rates for the fuzzy classifiers were similar across the various rule weighting and defuzzification schemes, demonstrating the strength of the statistical method for rule generation. Analysis of several real-world data sets shows that a PD-based FIS has comparable performance to a neuro-fuzzy system. The use of a PD based FIS however, provides insight into the structure of the data analyzed not available through the other approaches.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.220 · 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