MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794751958 · doi:10.3390/math6040050

Credibility Measure for Intuitionistic Fuzzy Variables

2018· article· en· W2794751958 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

VenueMathematics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredibilityMeasure (data warehouse)Fuzzy logicEntropy (arrow of time)Fuzzy measure theoryMathematicsComputer scienceCredibility theoryFuzzy setData miningEconometricsFuzzy numberArtificial intelligenceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Credibility measures in vague environments are to quantify the approximate chance of occurrence of fuzzy events. This paper presents a novel definition about credibility for intuitionistic fuzzy variables. We axiomatize this credibility measure and to clarify, give some examples. Based on the notion of these concepts, we provide expected values, entropy, and general formulae for the central moments and discuss them through examples.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.325
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.138 · 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