MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099521612 · doi:10.4304/jcp.4.4.330-337

SSWP: A Social Semantic Web Portal for Effective Communication in Construction

2009· article· en· W2099521612 on OpenAlexaff
Jinyue Zhang, Tamer E. El-Diraby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computers · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSocial Semantic WebSemantic Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—In the construction industry, there is a pressing need for computer systems that will facilitate information exchange and knowledge sharing among all industry practitioners. The Social Semantic Web Portal (SSWP) proposed in this paper will accomplish three tasks: (1) the streamlining of information exchange about any individual project, (2) the encouragement of knowledge sharing in general, and (3) the virtual grouping of people with similar interests to form communities of practice. A domain ontology is developed in order to encapsulate knowledge about industrial actors and their roles in relation to sibling ontologies that conceptualize construction products and processes. This domain ontology is then tailored to be the cornerstone (the knowledge base) that will enable the semantics of Web services. The concept of the Social Web is employed to validate knowledge items and to connect users with similar interests. The information flow is realized through a content-based publish/subscribe system. The SSWP will semantically connect a user with knowledge items and socially link a user to his/her peers. Index Terms—ontology, information exchange, knowledge

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.006

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ComputersSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207