Information preserving XML schema embedding
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A fundamental concern of information integration in an XML context is the ability to embed one or more source documents in a target document so that (a) the target document conforms to a target schema and (b) the information in the source document(s) is preserved. In this paper, information preservation for XML is formally studied, and the results of this study guide the definition of a novel notion of schema embedding between two XML DTD schemas represented as graphs. Schema embedding generalizes the conventional notion of graph similarity by allowing an edge in a source DTD schema to be mapped to a path in the target DTD. Instance-level embeddings can be defined from the schema embedding in a straightforward manner, such that conformance to a target schema and information preservation are guaranteed. We show that it is NP-complete to find an embedding between two DTD schemas. We also provide efficient heuristic algorithms to find candidate embeddings, along with experimental results to evaluate and compare the algorithms. These yield the first systematic and effective approach to finding information preserving XML mappings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it