Journal of
Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics
HOME   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   RELATED PUBLICATIONS   |   SEARCH     CONTACT US
 



ISSN: 1690-4524 (Online)


Peer Reviewed Journal via three different mandatory reviewing processes, since 2006, and, from September 2020, a fourth mandatory peer-editing has been added.

Indexed by
DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)Benefits of supplying DOAJ with metadata:
  • DOAJ's statistics show more than 900 000 page views and 300 000 unique visitors a month to DOAJ from all over the world.
  • Many aggregators, databases, libraries, publishers and search portals collect our free metadata and include it in their products. Examples are Scopus, Serial Solutions and EBSCO.
  • DOAJ is OAI compliant and once an article is in DOAJ, it is automatically harvestable.
  • DOAJ is OpenURL compliant and once an article is in DOAJ, it is automatically linkable.
  • Over 95% of the DOAJ Publisher community said that DOAJ is important for increasing their journal's visibility.
  • DOAJ is often cited as a source of quality, open access journals in research and scholarly publishing circles.
JSCI Supplies DOAJ with Meta Data
, Academic Journals Database, and Google Scholar


Listed in
Cabell Directory of Publishing Opportunities and in Ulrich’s Periodical Directory


Published by
The International Institute of Informatics and Cybernetics


Re-Published in
Academia.edu
(A Community of about 40.000.000 Academics)


Honorary Editorial Advisory Board's Chair
William Lesso (1931-2015)

Editor-in-Chief
Nagib C. Callaos


Sponsored by
The International Institute of
Informatics and Systemics

www.iiis.org
 

Editorial Advisory Board

Quality Assurance

Editors

Journal's Reviewers
Call for Special Articles
 

Description and Aims

Submission of Articles

Areas and Subareas

Information to Contributors

Editorial Peer Review Methodology

Integrating Reviewing Processes


Analogical and Logical Thinking – In the Context of Inter- or Trans-Disciplinary Communication and Real-Life Problems
Nagib Callaos, Jeremy Horne
(pages: 1-17)

Artificial Intelligence for Drone Swarms
Mohammad Ilyas
(pages: 18-22)

Brains, Minds, and Science: Digging Deeper
Maurício Vieira Kritz
(pages: 23-28)

Can AI Truly Understand Us? (The Challenge of Imitating Human Identity)
Jeremy Horne
(pages: 29-38)

Comparison of Three Methods to Generate Synthetic Datasets for Social Science
Li-jing Arthur Chang
(pages: 39-44)

Digital and Transformational Maturity: Key Factors for Effective Leadership in the Industry 4.0 Era
Pawel Poszytek
(pages: 45-48)

Does AI Represent Authentic Intelligence, or an Artificial Identity?
Jeremy Horne
(pages: 49-68)

Embracing Transdisciplinary Communication: Redefining Digital Education Through Multimodality, Postdigital Humanism and Generative AI
Rusudan Makhachashvili, Ivan Semenist
(pages: 69-76)

Engaged Immersive Learning: An Environment-Driven Framework for Higher Education Integrating Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration, Generative AI, and Practice-Based Assessment
Atsushi Yoshikawa
(pages: 77-94)

Focus On STEM at the Expense of Humanities: A Wrong Turn in Educational Systems
Kleanthis Kyriakidis
(pages: 95-101)

From Disciplinary Silos to Cyber-Transdisciplinary Networks: A Plural Epistemic Model for AGI-Era Knowledge Production
Cristo Leon, James Lipuma
(pages: 102-115)

Generative AI (Artificial Intelligence): What Is It? & What Are Its Inter- And Transdisciplinary Applications?
Richard S. Segall
(pages: 116-125)

How Does the CREL Framework Facilitate Effective Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Experiential Learning Through Role-Playing?
James Lipuma, Cristo Leon
(pages: 126-145)

Narwhals, Unicorns, and Big Tech's Messiah Complex: A Transdisciplinary Allegory for the Age of AI
Jasmin Cowin
(pages: 146-151)

Playing by Feel: Gender, Emotion, and Social Norms in Overwatch Role Choice
Cristo Leon, Angela Arroyo, James Lipuma
(pages: 152-163)

Responsible Integration of AI in Public Legal Education: Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities in Albania
Adrian Leka, Brunilda Haxhiu
(pages: 164-170)

The Civic Mission of Universities: Transdisciplinary Communication in Practice
Genejane Adarlo
(pages: 171-175)

The Promise and Peril of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education
James Lipuma, Cristo Leon
(pages: 176-182)

They Learned the Course! Why Then Do They Come to Tutorials?
Russell Jay Hendel
(pages: 183-187)

To Use or Not to Use Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Solve Terminology Issues?
Ekaterini Nikolarea
(pages: 188-195)

Transdisciplinary Supersymmetry: Generative AI in the Vector Space of Postdigital Humanism
Rusudan Makhachashvili, Ivan Semenist
(pages: 196-204)

Why Is Trans-Disciplinarity So Difficult?
Ekaterini Nikolarea
(pages: 205-207)


 

Abstracts

 


ABSTRACT


Influence of the Training Methods in the Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis Using Radial Basis Functions Artificial Neural Networks

Ángel Gutiérrez


The data available in the average clinical study of a disease is very often small. This is one of the main obstacles in the application of neural networks to the classification of biological signals used for diagnosing diseases. A rule of thumb states that the number of parameters (weights) that can be used for training a neural network should be around 15% of the available data, to avoid overlearning. This condition puts a limit on the dimension of the input space.

Different authors have used different approaches to solve this problem, like eliminating redundancy in the data, preprocessing the data to find centers for the radial basis functions, or extracting a small number of features that were used as inputs. It is clear that the classification would be better the more features we could feed into the network.

The approach utilized in this paper is incrementing the number of training elements with randomly expanding training sets. This way the number of original signals does not constraint the dimension of the input set in the radial basis network. Then we train the network using the method that minimizes the error function using the gradient descent algorithm and the method that uses the particle swarm optimization technique.

A comparison between the two methods showed that for the same number of iterations on both methods, the particle swarm optimization was faster, it was learning to recognize only the sick people. On the other hand, the gradient method was not as good in general better at identifying those people.

Full Text