MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Graph characterization of overlap-only TexMECS and other overlapping markup formalisms

2009· article· en· W2474486350 on OpenAlexaff
Yves Marcoux

Bibliographic record

VenueBalisage series on markup technologies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkup languageComputer scienceRotation formalisms in three dimensionsGraphProgramming languageSerializationSerializabilityDocument Structure DescriptionTheoretical computer scienceXMLInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebDatabase transactionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We establish a necessary and sufficient condition for a graph to correspond to the structure of an overlapping markup document, such as a well-formed TexMECS document (not using interrupted or virtual elements). This provides a test for determining if any given graph can be serialized into a TexMECS document—or any other similar language—using only overlapping markup. Such a test may prove useful in DOM-based applications, to determine if an attempted modification operation would preserve the overlap-only serializability of the document. For example, in a document editor using a graph-oriented interface, the user could be warned when a requested operation would prevent the document from being serializable with overlapping elements only. To our knowledge, no such characterization has been given before.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBalisage series on markup technologiesSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207