Towards Comparative Mining of Web Document Objects with NFA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The process of extracting comparative heterogeneous web content data which are derived and historical from related web pages is still at its infancy and not developed. Discovering potentially useful and previously unknown information or knowledge from web contents such as “list all articles on ’Sequential Pattern Mining’ written between 2007 and 2011 including title, authors, volume, abstract, paper, citation, year of publication,” would require finding the schema of web documents from different web pages, performing web content data integration, building their virtual or physical data warehouse before web content extraction and mining from the database. This paper proposes a technique for automatic web content data extraction, the WebOMiner system, which models web sites of a specific domain like Business to Customer (B2C) web sites, as object oriented database schemas. Then, non-deterministic finite state automata (NFA) based wrappers for recognizing content types from this domain are built and used for extraction of related contents from data blocks into an integrated database for future second level mining for deep knowledge discovery.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".