MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A New Approach of Possibility Single-Valued Neutrosophic Set and Its Application in Decision-Making Environment

2025· article· en· W4414063020 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abeer M.M. Jaradat, Yousef Al-Qudah, Abdullah Alsoboh, Faisal Al-Sharqi, Abdullrahman A. Al-Maqbali

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Analysis and Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplement (music)Set (abstract data type)Measure (data warehouse)Similarity measureIntersection (aeronautics)Similarity (geometry)Fuzzy logicProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The single-valued neutrosophic set (SVNS) is a widely known model for dealing with uncertain, conflicting, and indeterminate information. In practice, the SVNSs are very useful tools to be used in solving multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM), but in the process of processing by the three functions of SVNS the evaluation process for this handling disappears. To overcome this deficiency, we present in this work a new approach called possibility single-valued neutrosophic set (PSVNS) that differs from previous approaches. The implementation of this proposed approach in this work is based on giving each of the three functions in SVNS a fuzzy degree ranging between 0 and 1. As a result, firstly, the elementary notion of possibility single neutrosophic set is proposed, and some of its primary properties, i.e., subset, null set, absolute set, and complement are explored, as well as some numerical examples that explain the mechanism of the obtained results. Secondly, the basic set-theoretic operations i.e., such as extended union, the intersection of two PSVNSs, and the complement operation of PSVNS, as well as some relevant properties, are investigated, and numerical examples are provided to illustrate the mechanism behind these results. Lastly, the similarity measure between two PSVNSs is characterized with the help of an example. This technique of similarity measure is successfully used in decision-making to choose the appropriate college.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Analysis and ApplicationsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207