MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1920747368 · doi:10.1109/icde.1998.655823

ROL: a prototype for deductive object-oriented databases

2002· article· en· W1920747368 on OpenAlexaff
Mengchi Liu, Weidong Yu, Min Guo, Riqiang Shan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDatabase schemaDeductive databaseProgramming languageDatabaseQuery languageSemantics (computer science)Schema (genetic algorithms)Object (grammar)Set (abstract data type)Database designClass (philosophy)Information retrievalArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. ROL (Rule-based Object Language) is a deductive object-oriented database system. It provides a uniform language for defining, querying and manipulating a database. The ROL language integrates important features of deductive databases and object-oriented databases with well-defined declarative semantics. ROL also supports structured values, treating them as first-class citizens, and providing powerful mechanisms for representing both partial and complete information about sets. As a result, it directly supports non-first normal form relations and is an extension of pure value-oriented deductive database languages. A ROL database consists of three parts: a schema, a set of facts and a set of rules. The ROL system is organized into three layers: (1) the user interface (textual and graphical); (2) the query manager and the update manager; and (3) the memory manager and the object manager.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.016

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207