MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170358540 · doi:10.1504/ijwgs.2008.018886

Association-based dynamic computation of reputation in web services

2008· article· en· W2170358540 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

VenueInternational Journal of Web and Grid Services · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReputationWeb serviceComputer scienceIncentiveWorld Wide WebService (business)WS-PolicyAssociation (psychology)Web developmentWeb application securityBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web services are usually selected and composed based on their reputation. In general, the reputation of a web service is computed using the feedback provided by the user. However, the users' feedback bears many problems, including a low incentive for providing ratings and a bias towards positive or negative ratings. In this paper, we propose a method that overcomes the dependency on users' feedback for computing the reputation of web services. The proposed method dynamically computes the reputation of a web service based on its association with other web services. The association coefficient between any two web services is computed by utilising the statistics of how often they have been composed together. This factor is considered in our method to show the evolution of reputation over a period of time. The experimental results demonstrate the utility of the proposed method.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.249 · 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