MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411045118 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2025.113344

Three-way decision with granular rough sets

2025· article· en· W4411045118 on OpenAlexafffund
Junfang Luo, Mengjun Hu, Chengjun Shi, Yiyu Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Soft Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilNatural Science Foundation of Xinjiang Province
KeywordsRough setComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By integrating granular computing with rough set theory, granular rough sets enhance the semantics and effectiveness of decision-making through granule-based representations. Existing research has not thoroughly explored the issues of inducing three-way decision rules with granular rough sets, partly due to the challenge of meaningfully describing granules. To address these gaps, this paper proposes a unified framework for three-way decision models based on granular rough sets. Additionally, we introduce a generalized formulation for granule descriptions. It extends traditional representations to include all possible descriptions within a given domain. Through the lens of the proposed framework and granular descriptions, we formulate a three-way decision model in generalized granular rough sets and further demonstrate its instantiation potential across three specific types of granular spaces: quotient spaces, neighborhood-induced granular spaces, and maximal-clique-induced granular spaces. The effectiveness of the proposed models is illustrated through examples using set-valued information tables and experiments on real-world datasets. The results show that the proposed models have good performance and practical applicability. • A framework for three-way decision is proposed based on granular rough sets. • A new granule description is formulated to support general model building. • The framework is applied to three granular spaces with matching algorithms. • Experiments show improved accuracy and precision in the results.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Soft ComputingSame topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207