An Environment for Collective Perception based on Fuzzy and Semantic Approaches
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work proposes a software environment implementing a methodology for acquiring and exploiting the collective perception (CP) of Points of Interests (POIs) in a Smart City, which is meant to support decision makers in urban planning and management. This environment relies upon semantic knowledge discovery techniques and fuzzy computational approaches, including natural language processing, sentiment analysis, POI signatures and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps, turning them into a cohesive architectural blend in order to effectively gather the realistic perception of a user community towards given areas and attractions of a Smart City. The environment has been put to the test via a thorough experimentation against a massive user base of an online community with respect to a large metropolitan city (the City of Naples). Such an experimentation yielded consistent results, useful for providing decision makers with a clear awareness of the positive as well as critical aspects of urban areas, and thus helping them shape the measures to be taken for an improved city management and development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it