MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135023474 · doi:10.1002/spe.378

The Relationlog system prototype

2001· article· en· W2135023474 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Practice and Experience · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDatalogComputer scienceTupleProgramming languageSQLRelational databaseData definition languageData model (GIS)Object (grammar)Relational database management systemRelational modelExtension (predicate logic)Database modelDatabase designQuery languageData manipulation languageDatabaseArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Relationlog system is a novel persistent deductive database system for advanced data and knowledge‐based applications. It directly supports the storage and inference of data with complex structures, especially data supported in nested relational and complex‐object models. The Relationlog system supports the Relationlog query language, which is a typed extension of Datalog with tuples and sets and stands in the same relationship to the nested relational and complex‐object models as Datalog stands to the relational model. It also supports an SQL‐like data definition language and a declarative data manipulation language. This article introduces the Relationlog language, discusses the system architecture, the design decisions incorporated within its implementation, and our experience in developing the system. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · 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