Development and Analysis of Neural Networks Realized in the Presence of Granular Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we propose a design and evaluation framework of granular neural networks realized in the presence of information granules. Neural networks realized in this manner are able to process both nonnumerical data, such as information granules as well as numerical data. Information granules are meaningful and semantically sound entities formed by organizing existing knowledge and available experimental data. The directional nature of mapping between the input and output data needs to be considered when building information granules. The development of neural networks advocated in this article is realized as a two-phase process. First, a collection of information granules is formed through granulation of numeric data in the input and output spaces. Second, neural networks are constructed on the basis of information granules rather than original (numeric) data. The proposed method leads to the construction of neural networks in a completely new way. In comparison with traditional (numeric) neural networks, the networks developed in the presence of granular data require shorter learning time. They also produce the results (outputs) that are information granules rather than numeric entities. The quality of granular outputs generated by our neural networks is evaluated in terms of the coverage and specificity criteria that are pertinent to the characterization of the information granules.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".