MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972495172 · doi:10.1145/2723372.2723725

TEGRA

2015· article· en· W1972495172 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Chu, Yeye He, Kaushik Chakrabarti, Kris Ganjam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation retrievalRowTable (database)Relational databaseSchema (genetic algorithms)World Wide WebData miningDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known today that pages on the Web contain a large number of content-rich relational tables. Such tables have been systematically extracted in a number of efforts to empower important applications such as table search and schema discovery. However, a significant fraction of relational tables are not embedded in the standard HTML table tags, and are thus difficult to extract. In particular, a large number of relational tables are known to be in a ``list'' form, which contains a list of clearly separated rows that are not separated into columns.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4090.350

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207