Data Imputation in Related Time Series Using Fuzzy Set-Based Techniques
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the main challenges faced by people who use data from empirical research in their work is missing data. In many scientific disciplines and industries there are references to time series. The suitability of several methods to imputation of the missing data in the study of mutual links between the analysed time series have been presented and tested in this work. In this paper, known methods of supplementing data in time series were enriched by the use of fuzzy sets and their processing was tested on unique data from experimental research and a transport company database. Fuzzy linguistic descriptors-based methods of missing data imputation in databases containing time series are discussed. The proposed method has a high efficiency, which have been proven in a series of experiments with both artificial and real datasets. The proposed methodologies have been tested on theoretical example and empirical data sets from various fields: (1) ecological data on changes in bird arrival dates in the context of climate change and (2) data describing the transport of containers between ports on the Mediterranean. Moreover, an important novelty of this work is, in particular, an application of fuzzy techniques to the correction of the datasets containing bird migration descriptions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it