MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886110736 · doi:10.3233/jifs-169717

Dynamic interval-valued intuitionistic normal fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multi-attribute decision-making

2018· article· en· W2886110736 on OpenAlexaff
Jinqiu Li, Wei Chen, Zaoli Yang, Chuanyun Li, J.S. Sellers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeightingMathematicsInterval (graph theory)Mathematical optimizationEntropy (arrow of time)Fuzzy logicScoreComputer scienceData miningAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceStatisticsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) problems with temporal characteristics and attribute values of interval-valued intuitionistic normal fuzzy numbers, dynamic interval-valued intuitionistic normal fuzzy weighted averaging (DIINFWA) operators are presented, and their properties are proved. Since attribute weights and time weights have both been unknown in MADM problems, we propose a dynamic interval-valued intuitionistic normal fuzzy MADM method. In this method, a combination weighting method of gray correlation analysis and the maximum deviation method are used to solve for attribute weights, comprehensively considering the subjective experience of decision-makers and objectives of decision data; time weights are decomposed into time-constant and time-variable weight vectors. We determine time weights using the time function, combining information entropy and a logistic function. According to the algorithm of interval-valued intuitionistic normal fuzzy numbers, decision-making information in different time sequences are aggregated using the proposed DIINFWA operators. We construct a dynamic interval-valued intuitionistic normal fuzzy comprehensive decision matrix and use the VIKOR (Vlsekriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) method to obtain the optimal solution. Finally, the feasibility and significance of the presented method compared to existing methods are verified through analysis of numerical 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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy SystemsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207