A Hierarchical Approach to Interpretability of TS Rule-Based Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interpretability of fuzzy rule-based models has always been of significant interest to the research community and the research in this area led to a number of far-reaching results. In this study, we briefly revisit the methodology and concepts of interpretability of Takagi–Sugeno (T-S) rule-based models and develop a conceptual framework involving several levels at which rules are interpreted. The layers at which interpretability is positioned are structured hierarchically by starting with the initial fuzzy set level (originating from the design of the rules), moving to information granules of finite support (where interval calculus is engaged) and finally ending up with symbols built at the higher level. As T-S rule-based models are endowed with local functions forming the conclusion parts of the rules, with the use of the principle of justifiable granularity, we develop a way of forming an interpretable conclusion in the form of information granule. To facilitate interpretability of conditions of the rules, multidimensional fuzzy sets (coming as a result of clustering) are decomposed into a Cartesian product of 1-D fuzzy sets and the quality of the resulting decomposition is evaluated. The quality of granular rules is assessed by analyzing the relationship between specificity of condition and conclusion information granules. The rules emerging at the level of symbols are further interpreted by engaging linguistic approximation, which helps approximate a collection of linguistic terms of subconditions producing a linguistic summarization in the formτ(inputs areA) consisting of a certain linguistic quantifierτ. The performance of summarization is provided in the form of ranking of the relevance of the rules. Experimental studies using publicly available data are completed and analyzed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".