XTRACT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
XML is rapidly emerging as the new standard for data representation and exchange on the Web. An XML document can be accompanied by a Document Type Descriptor (DTD) which plays the role of a schema for an XML data collection. DTDs contain valuable information on the structure of documents and thus have a crucial role in the efficient storage of XML data, as well as the effective formulation and optimization of XML queries. In this paper, we propose XTRACT, a novel system for inferring a DTD schema for a database of XML documents. Since the DTD syntax incorporates the full expressive power of regular expressions , naive approaches typically fail to produce concise and intuitive DTDs. Instead, the XTRACT inference algorithms employ a sequence of sophisticated steps that involve: (1) finding patterns in the input sequences and replacing them with regular expressions to generate “general” candidate DTDs, (2) factoring candidate DTDs using adaptations of algorithms from the logic optimization literature, and (3) applying the Minimum Description Length (MDL) principle to find the best DTD among the candidates. The results of our experiments with real-life and synthetic DTDs demonstrate the effectiveness of XTRACT's approach in inferring concise and semantically meaningful DTD schemas for XML databases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.092 | 0.083 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".