MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296514159 · doi:10.18280/mmep.090422

Picture Fuzzy Choquet Integral Based Geometric Aggregation Operators and Its Application to Multi Attribute Decision-Making

2022· article· en· W4296514159 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Krishnan Deva, S. Mohanaselvi

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChoquet integralOperator (biology)Fuzzy logicFuzzy measure theoryExtension (predicate logic)MathematicsFuzzy setSet (abstract data type)CorrelativeComputer scienceFuzzy set operationsMathematical optimizationAlgebra over a fieldArtificial intelligencePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Picture fuzzy set is an extension of intuitionistic fuzzy set, which allows interpreting uncertain data in decision-making problems. This study provides aggregation operators based on Choquet integral, namely Choquet integral picture fuzzy geometric aggregation (CIPFGA) operator and Choquet integral picture fuzzy hybrid geometric aggregation (CIPFHGA) operator with certain properties of these operators are established. We validate the functioning of the operators with illustrative examples. The CIPFHGA operator has an added benefit of combining the weights of positions along with capturing the comprehensive correlative relationships of the criteria. Further, the proposed operators enable us to solve a numerical problem in picture fuzzy Multi attribute decision-making problem and also allows to make a comparison study with the existing literature.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207