MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131821459 · doi:10.5539/cis.v4n4p46

An Integrated Conceptual Model for Temporal Data Warehouse Security

2011· article· en· W2131821459 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marwa Salah Farhan, Laila Elfangary, Yehia Helmy

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData warehouseConceptual modelDimensional modelingTemporal databaseWarehouseData scienceData miningDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past few years, several conceptual approaches have been proposed for the specification of the main multidimensional (MD) properties of the data warehouse (DW) repository. However, most of them deal with isolated aspects of the DW and do not provide designers with an integrated and standard method for designing the whole DW life cycle (ETL processes, data sources, DW repository and so on).Some approaches are depending on specific platform or neglecting important issues in DW design life cycle. Extraction-transformation-loading (ETL) processes play an important role in data warehouse architecture because they are responsible of integrating data from heterogeneous data sources into the DW repository. This paper proposes a conceptual model to refresh data warehouse by (insert, update, delete) data using ETL processes and considering DW security requirements. Firstly, the proposed ETL model is based on Unified Modeling Language (UML), which allows us to accomplish the conceptual modeling of ETL processes .secondly; this part focuses on how to integrate the proposed ETL model with the DW model. The proposed DW model depends on the Model Driven Architecture (MDA). MDA is a standard framework for software development that addresses the complete life cycle of designing, deploying, integrating, and managing applications by using models in software development. This paper proposes an integrated conceptual model for addressing temporal data warehouse security requirements (CMTDWS).

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.401
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.019 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207