MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031337737 · doi:10.4018/jdm.2008070104

Theories of Meaning in Schema Matching

2008· article· en· W2031337737 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

VenueJournal of Database Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchema matchingSchema (genetic algorithms)Computer scienceConceptual schemaMatching (statistics)Database schemaSchema migrationEpistemologyInformation retrievalData integrationData miningPsychologySemi-structured modelGender schema theoryMathematicsSocial psychologyDatabase designPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schema matching is the identification of database elements with similar meaning as preparation for subsequent database integration. Over the past 20 years, different schema-matching methods have been proposed and have been shown to be successful to various degrees. However, schema matching is an ongoing research area and the problem is not yet considered to be solved. This article reviews existing schema-matching methods from the perspective of theories of meanings drawn from philosophy and psychology. It positions existing methods, raises questions for future research based on these theories, and shows how these theories can form a firm theoretical basis as well as guide future schema-matching research.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.233 · 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