MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013652437 · doi:10.18280/isi.250110

Conflict Analysis Based on Three-Way Decision Theoretic Fuzzy Rough Set over Two Universes

2020· article· en· W3013652437 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiao Kang Tang, Ting Zeng, Yang Tan, Benxiang Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRough setConflict analysisFuzzy logicSet (abstract data type)Decision analysisMathematicsFuzzy setComputer scienceMathematical economicsArtificial intelligenceSociologyConflict resolutionSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conflict is an inevitable feature of human endeavor. The conflict analysis has great theoretical and practical significance. Some scholars have discussed three-way decision in conflict analysis with probabilistic rough set (RS) over two universes, but have not probed deep into the fuzzy rough set (FRS) for conflict analysis. To make up for the gap, this paper firstly introduces the concepts and properties of conflict information system (CIS) and probabilistic CIS over two universes. Next, a brand-new system called FRS-CIS was established, followed by the construction of probability measure function and two novel mappings in the probabilistic FRS-CIS over two universes. Furthermore, the authors discussed the properties of probability measure and the lower and upper approximations of with parameters and corresponding to each mapping. Finally, (0,1)-probabilistic FRS and 0.5-probabilistic FRS were presented for the FRS-CIS and explained with examples, according to the three-way decision theoretic RS under the CIS over two universes. The research results shed new light to solving the FRS under FRS-CIS over two universes.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207