MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532543454 · doi:10.1109/is.2006.348479

A Method for Fuzzy Clustering with Ordinal Attributes Replaced by Fuzzy Set Parameters

2006· article· en· W2532543454 on OpenAlexaff
Roelof K. Brouwer

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 3rd International IEEE Conference Intelligent Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsOrdinal dataFuzzy setOrdinal regressionCluster analysisFuzzy clusteringFuzzy logicOrdinal optimizationData miningSet (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceFuzzy classificationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pattern vectors to be clustered may have attributes of various types including ordinal. The latter type of attribute with values such as "poor", "very poor", "good", and "very good" are neither entirely numerical nor entirely qualitative. This leads to difficulties in clustering since it is meaningless to take differences of values of these ordinal attributes as is required for finding distance between pattern vectors. Representing ordinal values by numbers and then finding differences are incorrect. Rather the ordinal values themselves may considered as linguistic values of linguistic variables corresponding to fuzzy sets. This paper discusses a method of fuzzy c-means clustering that uses the moments and areas of fuzzy sets to represent the value of ordinal attributes and also the continuous values of the interval scaled attributes

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)0.008
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 3rd International IEEE Conference Intelligent SystemsSame topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207