MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2361443235 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n9p22

Solving the First Kind Fuzzy Integral Equations Using a Hybrid Regularization Method and Bernstein Polynomials

2016· article· en· W2361443235 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFuzzy Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsIntegral equationRegularization (linguistics)Summation equationFuzzy logicIntegro-differential equationVolterra integral equationBernstein polynomialMathematical analysisApplied mathematicsDifferential equationRiccati equationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hybrid of regularization methodand Bernstein polynomials is used to solve the first kind fuzzy integral equations. In this paper, first the regularization method applied to convert the first kind fuzzy integral equation into the second kind fuzzy integral equation. Then by approximating Bernstein polynomials, the obtained second kind fuzzy integral equation is solved. In this method, one parameter was created in the second kind equation. When this parameter tends to zero, the solutions of integral equation of the second kind tend to solutions of the integral equation of the first kind. The obtained solutions are comparable to the solutions of the other similar methods. Performance of the mentioned method is illustrated by considering some example.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.254 · 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