MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144639743 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2005.843975

Genetically Optimized Fuzzy Decision Trees

2005· letter· en· W2144639743 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2005
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDecision treeGeneralizationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningTree (set theory)Incremental decision treeFuzzy logicFuzzy setDecision tree learningFitness functionMembership functionDefuzzificationFuzzy numberFuzzy classificationGenetic algorithmMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we are concerned with genetically optimized fuzzy decision trees (G-DTs). Decision trees are fundamental architectures of machine learning, pattern recognition, and system modeling. Starting with the generic decision tree with discrete or interval-valued attributes, we develop its fuzzy set-based generalization. In this generalized structure we admit the values of the attributes that are represented by some membership functions. Such fuzzy decision trees are constructed in the setting of genetic optimization. The underlying genetic algorithm optimizes the parameters of the fuzzy sets associated with the individual nodes where they play a role of fuzzy "switches" by distributing a flow of processing completed within the tree. We discuss various forms of the fitness function that help capture the essence of the problem at hand (that could be either of classification nature when dealing with discrete outputs or regression-like when handling a continuous output variable). We quantify a nature of the generalization of the tree by studying an optimally adjusted spreads of the membership functions located at the nodes of the decision tree. A series of experiments exploiting synthetic and machine learning data is used to illustrate the performance of the G-DTs.

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), Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · 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