MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999648422 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2020.2966172

Prediction Intervals for Granular Data Streams Based on Evolving Type-2 Fuzzy Granular Neural Network Dynamic Ensemble

2020· article· en· W2999648422 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Liu, Jun Zhao, Wei Wang, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceData stream miningArtificial neural networkData miningInterval (graph theory)Merge (version control)Classifier (UML)Granular computingFuzzy logicArtificial intelligenceEnsemble learningMachine learningRough setMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Granular data streams (GDSs) are a class of high-level abstract multitime scale description of data streams. Prediction intervals (PIs) for GDSs that provide estimated values as well as their corresponding reliability play an important role for assisting on-site workers to perceive the nonstationary environment in real time. However, constructing reliable PIs for GDSs constitutes a significant challenge. To provide a solution to the problem, an interval type-2 (IT2) fuzzy granular neural network (FGNN) dynamic ensemble approach (IT2FGNNDEnsemble) is proposed in this article. To fully reflect the uncertainty of GDSs, an interval value learning algorithm based IT2FGNN is developed, which can automatically generate, prune, merge, and realize recall in a single-pass learning mode. In addition, an evolving dynamic ensemble method is presented by providing an adaptive structure that considers a tradeoff between coverage and width of PIs, which can dynamically generate and prune the element of an ensemble according to current data tendency. A number of synthetic and industrial data streams experimentally validate the performance of the proposed IT2FGNNDEnsemble by using the state-of-the-art comparative methods. It is demonstrated that the proposed approach exhibits a good performance on PIs for practical applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy SystemsSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207