MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402585642

GDE: General Data Exchange with Schema and Data Level Mappings.

2013· article· en· W2402585642 on OpenAlexaff
Iluju Kiringa, Rana Awada

Bibliographic record

VenueAMW · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSchema (genetic algorithms)Data exchangeSet (abstract data type)Theoretical computer scienceInformation retrievalKnowledge baseData miningDatabaseArtificial intelligenceProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data exchange (DE) [5, 3] and data coordination [1, 2, 6] are two important settings that were introduced previously in the literature to resolve the problem of integrating information that resides in different sources. A DE setting moves data residing in independent applications, which refer to the same object using the same name, and accesses it through a new target schema. However, a data coordination setting allows the access of data residing in independent sources and that possibly belong to different sets of vocabularies, without necessarily exchanging it and while maintaining autonomy. Although a data coordination setting provides users with an amalgamated view of related information, this solution is not enough for applications that require a view of related information using a unified set of vocabularies for periodic reporting and decision making. We introduce a general data exchange (GDE) setting that extends DE settings to allow collaboration at the instance level, using a mapping table M , that specifies for each constant value in the source, the set of related (or corresponding) constant values in the target. We show in this paper that a GDE setting can be formalized using the knowledge exchange framework introduced in [4]. It allows us to store a target knowledge base (KB) which consists of a subset of the explicit data exchanged that is necessary to infer the full set of exchanged information using a set Σt of FO sentences. We identify in our work the class of “best” KBs to materialize and we define the set of certain answers.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.026
Open science0.0070.015
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.006

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.120 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAMWSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207