MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THE DATALOG<sup><scp>DL</scp></sup> COMBINATION OF DEDUCTION RULES AND DESCRIPTION LOGICS

2007· article· en· W2034589153 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Mei, Zuoquan Lin, Harold Boley, Jie Li, Virendrakumar C. Bhavsar

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Intelligence · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsResearch and Productivity CouncilUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDatalogDescription logicComputer scienceSemantic reasonerDecidabilityProgramming languageRuleMLWeb Ontology LanguageSemantic WebSemantic Web Rule LanguageParameterized complexityTheoretical computer scienceOntology languageArtificial intelligenceXMLAlgorithmWorld Wide WebSocial Semantic Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uniting ontologies and rules has become a central topic in the Semantic Web. Bridging the discrepancy between these two knowledge representations, this paper introduces DatalogDL as a family of hybrid languages, where Datalog rules are parameterized by various DL (description logic) languages ranging from to . Making DatalogDL a decidable system with complexity of EXPTIME, we propose independent properties in the DL body as the restriction to hybrid rules, and weaken the safeness condition to balance the trade‐off between expressivity and reasoning power. Building on existing well‐developed techniques, we present a principled approach to enrich (RuleML) rules with information from (OWL) ontologies, and develop a prototype system combining a rule engine (OO jDREW) with a DL reasoner (RACER).

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational IntelligenceSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207