MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766846120 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2017.2768327

On the Accuracy–Convergence Tradeoff in Sigmoid Fuzzy Cognitive Maps

2017· article· en· W2766846120 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSigmoid functionConvergence (economics)Stability (learning theory)Computer scienceFuzzy logicArtificial intelligenceFunction (biology)Fuzzy cognitive mapMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmFuzzy setMachine learningFuzzy classificationArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, a learning procedure to improve the overall convergence of sigmoid fuzzy cognitive maps used in pattern classification was proposed. The algorithm estimates the slope of each sigmoid neuron while preserving the causal weights. This paper proposes a more realistic error function for this algorithm, which is based on 1) the dissimilarity between two consecutive responses, and 2) the dissimilarity between the current output and the expected one. As a second contribution, we introduce sufficient conditions to arrive at stability features. These conditions allow assessing the accuracy-convergence tradeoff attached to the proposed learning procedure.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.234 · 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