MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413371190 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2025.3596066

CS3W-GBG: A Cost-Sensitive Three-Way Granular-Ball Generation Method

2025· article· en· W4413371190 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Yang, Fan Zhao, Guoyin Wang, Witold Pedrycz, Shuyin Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBall (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an innovative methodology in data processing and knowledge representation, granular-ball computing (GBC) adaptively generates distinct neighborhoods for individual objects, thereby improving both generality and flexibility. By replacing point inputs with granular-balls (GBs), GBC achieves substantial efficiency gains. However, traditional GB-based classifiers may produce unreliable classifications under uncertain conditions. To address this limitation, we propose a novel approach that integrates three-way decision (3WD) theory with GBC, enabling robust handling of uncertain classification problems. This study first introduces a sequential three-way decision with fuzzy granular-ball rough sets (S3WD-FGBRS). We systematically analyze the changing rules of the multilevel decision cost in S3WD-FGBRS and its three regions. Building upon the principle of justifiable granularity, we develop a cost-sensitive three-way granular-ball generation method (CS3W-GBG) based on S3WD-FGBRS that incorporates a granularity optimization mechanism. To validate our approach, we conduct comprehensive experiments using three state-of-the-art GB classifiers and two benchmark classifiers on 12 publicly available datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that CS3W-GBG exhibits strong resilience in processing uncertain data through its 3WD strategy. Furthermore, our method achieves competitive performance compared to existing approaches in terms of classification accuracy and robustness.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy SystemsSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207