MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246088115 · doi:10.2991/ijcis.2010.3.2.8

Hierarchical Architectures of Fuzzy Models: From Type-1 fuzzy sets to Information Granules of Higher Type

2010· article· en· W4246088115 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicType (biology)Computer scienceFuzzy setData miningFuzzy classificationArtificial intelligenceDefuzzificationMathematicsFuzzy numberBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complex phenomena are perceived from different perspectives, diversified conceptual points of view and at various levels of granularity. Symbolic and sub-symbolic processing becomes an inherently visible computing practice. Distributed nature of perception becomes reflected in topologies of multi-agent systems. All of these facets challenge the well-established paradigms of system modeling including fuzzy models and neural networks. In spite of the diversity of existing architectures and underlying algorithms, a vast majority of fuzzy models adheres to the surprisingly homogeneous principles of Granular Computing, that are associated with the processing of granular information. In this study, being cognizant of this underpinning, we concentrate on the architectures and fundamentals supporting the reconciliation and characterization of a family of fuzzy models aimed at the representation of the same system (phenomenon) from different cognitive perspectives. The variety of points of view is reflected in different levels of granularity (specificity) of fuzzy sets present in individual models as well as different feature (attribute) spaces being used in the individual models. We discuss a way in which type-2 fuzzy sets come to the play as a result of the overall characterization. An effective way of determining of such fuzzy sets is presented. Further studies on the interpretability of fuzzy sets at the level of linguistic valuation are presented and with this regard where it is shown how these can be carried out in the setting of type-2 fuzzy sets. The question of logic operators constructed in presence of a large number of fuzzy sets is raised along with a proposal of statistically grounded logic operators, which capture some characteristics of membership degrees to be processed.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.263 · 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