Representing and Querying Data Transformations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern information systems often store data that has been transformed and integrated from a variety of sources. This integration may obscure the original source semantics of data items. For many tasks, it is important to be able to determine not only where data items originated, but also why they appear in the integration as they do and through what transformation they were derived. This problem is known as data provenance. In this work, we consider data provenance at the schema and mapping level. In particular, we consider how to answer questions such as "what schema elements in the source(s) contributed to this value", or "through what transformations or mappings was this value derived?" Towards this end, we elevate schemas and mappings to first-class citizens that are stored in a repository and are associated with the actual data values. An extended query language, called MXQL, is also developed that allows meta-data to be queried as regular data and we describe its implementation scenario.
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 | 0.017 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".