The ontological perspectives of the semantic Web and the Metadata Harvesting Protocol: Applications of metadata for improving Web search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article compare les structures ontologiques implicites du Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) a celles du Web semantique du Consortium W3C (World Wide Web Consortium). Les deux projets repondent aux problemes relies a la technologie actuellement utilisee par les moteurs de recherche, en particulier le lien « page Web » / « document » etabli implicitement par les moteurs de recherche, ce qui est inapproprie pour un reperage efficace. Les objectifs de Web semantique visent a attenuer ces problemes en fournissant un balisage semantique procurant ainsi un acces hautement granulaire aux segments semantiques significatifs a l'interieur de documents Web complets. Cette approche s'apparente aux principes d'indexation deja etablis dans les bibliotheques specialisees et les bases de donnees en ligne: un acces en profondeur et granulaire qui va au dela du document pour acceder aux elements semantiques primordiaux. L'OAI-PMH travaille avec des notices de metadonnees fournies par les createurs de donnees et stockees dans un depot centralise de metadonnees. Ce modele met donc l'emphase sur le document comme entite ontologique centrale, et, donc, ressemble au modele « d'acces document » des systemes traditionnels d'acces par vedettes-matiere.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.038 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".