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
Historically, the process of synchronizing a decision support system with data from operational systems has been referred to as Extract, Transform, Load (ETL) and the tools supporting such process have been referred to as ETL tools. Recently, ETL was replaced by the more comprehensive acronym, data integration (DI). DI describes the process of extracting and combining data from a variety of data source formats, transforming that data into a unified data model representation and loading it into a data store. This is done in the context of a variety of scenarios, such as data acquisition for business intelligence, analytics and data warehousing, but also synchronization of data between operational applications, data migrations and conversions, master data management, enterprise data sharing and delivery of data services in a service-oriented architecture context, amongst others. With these scenarios relying on up-to-date information it is critical to implement a highly performing, scalable and easy to maintain data integration system. This is especially important as the complexity, variety and volume of data is constantly increasing and performance of data integration systems is becoming very critical. Despite the significance of having a highly performing DI system, there has been no industry standard for measuring and comparing their performance. The TPC, acknowledging this void, has released TPC-DI, an innovative benchmark for data integration. This paper motivates the reasons behind its development, describes its main characteristics including workload, run rules, metric, and explains key decisions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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