Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analytics-as-a-Service (AaaS) has become indispensable because it affords stakeholders to discover knowledge in Big Data. Previously, data stored in data warehouses follow some schema and standardization which leads to efficient data mining. However, the Big Data epoch has witnessed the rise of structured, semi-structured, and unstructured data, a trend that motivated enterprises to employ the NoSQL data storages to accommodate the high-dimensional data. Unfortunately, the existing data mining techniques which are designed for schema-oriented storages are non-applicable to the unstructured data style. Thus, the AaaS though still in its infancy, is gaining widespread attention for its ability to provide novel ways and opportunities to mine the heterogeneous data. In this paper, we discuss our AaaS tool that performs terms and topics extraction and organization from unstructured data sources such as NoSQL databases, textual contents (e.g., websites), and structured sources (e.g. SQL). The tool is built on methodologies such as tagging, filtering, association maps, and adaptable dictionary. The evaluation of the tool shows high accuracy in the mining process.
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 | 0.015 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".