A Pattern Language for Knowledge Discovery in a Semantic Web context
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontologies are used to represent data and share knowledge of a specific domain, and in recent years they tend to be used in many applications such as database integration, peer-to-peer systems, e-commerce, semantic web services, bioinformatics, or social networks. Feeding ontological domain knowledge into those applications has proven to increase flexibility and inter-operability and interpretability of data and knowledge. As more data is gathered/generated by those applications, it becomes important to analyze and transform it to meaningful information. One possibility is to use data mining techniques to extract patterns from those large amounts of data. One challenging general problem in mining ontological data is taking into account not only domain concepts, properties and instances, but also hierarchical structures of those concepts and properties. In this paper, the authors research the specific problem of extracting ontology-based sequential patterns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it