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

Fuzzy Classification Using Pattern Discovery

2007· article· en· W2139565979 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Hamilton-Wright, Daniel W. Stashuk, Hamid R. Tizhoosh

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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

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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy SystemsSame topicFuzzy Logic and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207