MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Improvement of Consensus in Group Decision-Making Through an Optimal Distribution of Information Granularity

2022· article· en· W4320031228 on OpenAlex
Francisco Javier Cabrerizo, Juan Carlos Gonzalez-Quesada, Juan Antonio Morente-Molinera, Ignacio Javier Pérez, Enrique Herrera‐Viedma, Witold Pedrycz

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

Venue2022 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranularityComputer scienceGranular computingGroup decision-makingPreferenceData miningProcess (computing)Group (periodic table)Fuzzy logicMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsRough set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information granularity is an essential concept of Granular Computing that has successfully been applied in group decision-making to improve the consensus. Unlike the existing approaches, in which a uniform distribution of information granularity has been employed, this study proposes to improve the consensus by invoking a process of an optimal information granularity distribution across the experts' assessments provided in the form of fuzzy preference relations. An illustrative example and some simulated group decision-making problems are conducted to show evidence of its effectiveness. The results demonstrate that this optimal process, by being more flexible than the ones assuming that the information granularity is distributed in a uniform way, reaches a higher level of consensus.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.330 · 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