Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Database Engineering & Applications Symposium
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The International Database Engineering & Applications Symposium (IDEAS) was established in 1997. IDEAS'10 is the fourteenth annual meeting in the IDEAS series and is being held in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, during August 16-18, 2010. The conference aims to address the needs of the academic community in database and engineering, its application found in an ever increasing number of domains. It brings together academics, government and industry professionals to discuss recent progress and challenges in a broad range of areas in this domain such as data mining, databases, information retrieval, machine learning, as well as software engineering. IDEAS'10 also serves as a platform for theoreticians and practitioners to exchange their original research ideas on academic or application aspects of computing and engineering of database systems. They can present their new findings and share their experiences on integrating new technologies into products and applications. The symposium facilitates the discussion of their work as applied to real-life situations, and their development and operations of challenging database related systems, while identifying unsolved challenges. In terms of submissions, we have attracted many high-quality papers submitted by authors globally including: Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Macedonia, Norway, Portugal and United States. For IDEAS'10, we continue to keep our tradition of inviting international experts in various aspects of database engineering to join our program committee. As a result, our Program Committee consists of professionals who have done an excellent job in finishing the single-blind review and on-line double-blind debate processes built into ConfSys. On average, about 97% of reviews were submitted by the due date and about 3.85 reviews were received for each paper. Thus the paper selection process was thorough and competitive. On average, each paper was refereed by at least 3.85 reviewers, and about 17% of submissions were accepted as full research papers. This year, we have an intensive program that spans over three days. In addition to full research papers we also include selected short papers and posters, which allow authors to present new applications and explore untried research directions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle