MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144365306 · doi:10.1142/s0218488505003643

GLOBAL PROPAGATION IN BAYESIAN NETWORKS VS SEMIJOIN PROGRAMS IN RELATIONAL DATABASES

2005· article· en· W2144365306 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Wu, Michael S. K. M. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian networkProbabilistic logicRelational databaseComputer scienceBayesian probabilityProbabilistic databaseBayesian statisticsStatistical relational learningLinkage (software)Artificial intelligenceDatabaseBayesian inferenceDatabase theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bayesian networks have been well established as an effective framework for uncertainty management using probability. Various methods for probabilistic reasoning in Bayesian networks have been developed and matured. Recently, research has shown that there exists an intriguing relationship between Bayesian networks and relational databases. Adding to that intriguing relationship, in this paper, we reveal that the global propagation method for probabilistic reasoning in Bayesian networks has a close tie with the well known semijoin programs for query answering in relational databases. This linkage between these two apparently different but closely related knowledge representations suggests that well developed techniques for query answering in relational databases could be applied to probabilistic reasoning in Bayesian networks for large and complex domains.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based SystemsSame topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207