MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293252862

Experience-based analytics

2015· article· en· W2293252862 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science and Software Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalyticsComputer scienceData scienceData analysisSoftware analyticsBig dataPopulationCultural analyticsBusiness analyticsSemantic analyticsWorld Wide WebData miningThe InternetBusiness modelBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data has been called the new oil. Despite of its high value, only one percent of the world's data has been extracted for its insights. Data analytics is currently available only to the technical elite of data and IT experts, completely out of reach for general users. End users today only have indirect access to insights, completely dependent on this technical elite. However, no exponential growth in the population of IT and data experts is fast enough to meet the demand of volume and speed of data analytics to go beyond today's one percent of data analyzed. We are far from the ultimate data utopia in which data analytics is provided as a utility, available to and accessible by general users in real time. This paper introduces experience-based analytics: analytics for end users in accessible forms that serve their data analytics requirements as individuals in real time, in a manner that is contextually relevant, transparent with cognitive insights and anticipation. The notion is for the data and IT experts to re-think from delivering analytics results to users as a final form of consumption, to a new paradigm in which general users are enable to perform their own analytics.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.007

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Science and Software EngineeringSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207