MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000719367 · doi:10.1109/icdmw.2009.18

Semantic-Rich Markov Models for Web Prefetching

2009· article· en· W2000719367 on OpenAlexaff
Nizar R. Mabroukeh, C. I. Ezeife

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)Social Semantic WebSemantic Web StackMarkov chainSemantic WebMarkov modelData WebInformation retrievalContext (archaeology)Markov processOntologyWorld Wide WebData miningWeb serviceMachine learningProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domain knowledge for Web applications is currently being made available as domain ontology with the advent of the semantic Web, in which semantics govern relationships among objects of interest (e. g., commercial items to be purchased in an e-commerce Web site). Our earlier work proposed to integrate semantic information into all phases of the Web usage mining process, for an intelligent semantics-aware Web usage mining framework. There are ways to integrate semantic information into Markov models used in the third phase for next page request prediction. Semantic information is combined with the transition probability matrix of a Markov model. This way, it provides a low order Markov model with intelligent accurate predictions and less complexity than higher order models, also solving the problem of contradicting prediction. This paper proposes to use semantic information to prune states in selective Markov models SMM, semantic information can lead to context-aware higher order Markov models with about 16% less space complexity.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207