MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantization of Continuous Data for Pattern Based Rule Extraction

2009· book-chapter· en· W95090502 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Hamilton-Wright, Daniel W. Stashuk

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of GuelphMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationData miningComputer scienceRule of inferenceQuantization (signal processing)AlgorithmRough setInferenceTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A great deal of interesting real-world data is encountered through the analysis of continuous variables, however many of the robust tools for rule discovery and data characterization depend upon the underlying data existing in an ordinal, enumerable or discrete data domain. Tools that fall into this category include much of the current work in fuzzy logic and rough sets, as well as all forms of event-based pattern discovery tools based on probabilistic inference. Through the application of discretization techniques, continuous data is made accessible to the analysis provided by the strong tools of discrete-valued data mining. The most common approach for discretization is quantization, in which the range of observed continuous valued data are assigned to a fixed number of quanta, each of which covers a particular portion of the range within the bounds provided by the most extreme points observed within the continuous domain. This chapter explores the effects such quantization may have, and the techniques that are available to ameliorate the negative effects of these efforts, notably fuzzy systems and rough sets.

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)0.012
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.007

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207