MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2279848971 · doi:10.1109/wi-iat.2015.173

Querying RDF Data with Imprecise Time Phrases

2015· article· en· W2279848971 on OpenAlexaff
Majid RobatJazi, Marek Reformat, Witold Pedrycz, Petr Musı́lek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRDFComputer scienceSPARQLSimple Knowledge Organization SystemRDF SchemaInformation retrievalRDF query languageCwmSemantic WebLinked dataRepresentation (politics)RDF/XMLData miningWeb search queryWeb query classificationSearch engine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semantic Web is an important step towards significant changes in representation and utilization of data on the web. The use of Resource Description Framework (RDF) as a fundamental data format creates new ways of expressing and exploring relations existing between pieces of data. An importance of articulating temporal aspects using RDF data, and a need to query these data using vague and imprecise terms is a challenging undertaking. This paper presents a fuzzy-based approach to deal with RDF data containing temporal information and built using non-trivial data structures (RDF Schemas). It includes description of built-in predicates needed for constructing temporal queries and supporting imprecise phrases describing time and data features. A simple case study using DBLP database illustrates the application of the proposed approach.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.013
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207