MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159886288 · doi:10.1109/tai.1995.479781

GRG: knowledge discovery using information generalization, information reduction, and rule generation

2002· article· en· W2159886288 on OpenAlexaff
Ning Shan, Howard J. Hamilton, N. Cercone

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReductTupleReduction (mathematics)GeneralizationComputer scienceData miningRough setSet (abstract data type)Knowledge extractionRelational databaseDecision tableArtificial intelligenceMathematicsDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the three-step GRG approach for learning decision rules from large relational databases. In the first step, an attribute-oriented concept tree ascension technique is applied to generalize an information system. This step loses some information but substantially improves the efficiency of the following steps. In the second step, the reduction technique is applied to generate a minimized information system called a reduct which contains a minimal subset of the generalized attributes and the smallest number of distinct tuples for those attributes. Finally, a set of maximally general rules are derived directly from the reduct. These rules can be used to interpret and understand the active mechanisms underlying the database.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.016
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207