ArticleComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022
High-Discrimination Comparison Algorithm for the Comprehensive Evaluation of Innovation Ability in Colleges and Universities under Uncertain Information.
Article in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The innovation ability of students is one of the most important objectives that need to be cultivated in colleges and universities. The comprehensive evaluation of innovation ability discussed in the study can be divided into two stages: the first stage can be called preliminary evaluation and its main target is to identify students with innovative potential; in the second stage, the target objects found in the previous stage will be evaluated quantitatively and ranked. However, it is always difficult to quantitatively evaluate the innovation ability by using traditional algorithms. Based on the above analysis, the study proposes an algorithm to quantitatively evaluate the innovation ability with the help of management thought and fuzzy mathematics. Data are the basis of evaluation, and the accuracy of the data directly determines the quality of the algorithm; the data structure of the incompletely probabilistic fuzzy set is proposed in the study; the data structure can fully consider the fuzziness of the problem and the hesitation in the decision-making process; it can save the original detailed data to the maximum extent. Certainly, certain information may be lost or only the value range can be determined; there are usually some unknowns in the evaluation data, and the consistency optimization model is proposed for solving the problem. Usually, there are certain contradictions among the evaluation data; the definition of the consistency degree is proposed in the study; the consistency can be verified in time after all the unknowns are obtained, and the automatic adjustment module will be activated immediately if the value of the consistency degree exceeds the warning threshold. Finally, after verifying the data consistency, the solution can be obtained by solving the optimization model. Several experiments have been carried out to verify the effectiveness and high-discrimination ability of the algorithm proposed in the study; meanwhile, the superiority of the algorithm is further verified through comparisons with other outstanding algorithms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.