MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116938516 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2025.3647609

A Survey on Neural Network Prediction Based on Fuzzy Information Granules: Methods, Applications, and Future Challenges

2025· article· W7116938516 on OpenAlexaff
Xunjin Wu, Weiping Ding, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsInterpretabilityArtificial neural networkCurse of dimensionalityStrengths and weaknessesFuzzy logicNeuro-fuzzyDimensionality reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the era of artificial intelligence, the complexity and diversity of data have posed unprecedented challenges for prediction tasks. Fuzzy information granules (FIGs) have emerged as a powerful technique to simplify these tasks by reducing data dimensionality and extracting interpretable trend information. This survey provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of FIG-based neural network prediction models, highlighting their theoretical foundations, practical applications, and future research directions. The integration of FIGs with neural networks enhances prediction accuracy and interpretability, making them suitable for complex and high-dimensional data. The main contributions of this survey include a systematic review of the theoretical underpinnings of FIGs and neural networks, a detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of various FIG-based models, and an exploration of their applications in critical domains such as transportation, energy, and healthcare. Future research directions include developing more advanced and interpretable models, exploring new applications, and fostering interdisciplinary collaborations. Emerging trends such as quantum computing, hybrid neural architectures, and edge AI are expected to further enhance the capabilities of FIG-based neural network models. This survey is of significant value as it provides a unified perspective on the advancements in FIG-based neural network prediction models and highlights the unique contributions of FIGs in enhancing model interpretability and performance.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy SystemsSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207