MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964840128 · doi:10.4018/jkm.2007070106

The Key Requirements for Deploying Knowledge Management Services in a Semantic Grid Environment

2007· article· en· W1964840128 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Knowledge Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsNew York Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemantic gridComputer scienceGridGrid computingSemantic WebSemantic computingWorld Wide WebDRMAAStandardizationSemantic Web StackKnowledge managementSemantic technologyData scienceService (business)Social Semantic WebKey (lock)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to investigate the requirements of knowledge management (KM) services deployment in a Semantic Grid environment. A wide range of literature on Grid Computing, Semantic Web, and KM have been reviewed, related, and interpreted. The benefits of the Semantic Web and the Grid Computing convergence have been enumerated and related to KM principles in a complete service model. Although the Grid Computing contributed the shared resources, most of the KM tool obstacles within the grid are to be resolved at the semantic and cultural levels more than at the physical or logical grid levels. The early results from academia show a synergy and the potentiality of leveraging knowledge at a wider scale. However, the plethora of information produced in this environment will result in a serious information overload, unless proper standardization, automated relations, syndication, and validation techniques are developed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.272 · 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