A Preliminary Survey on Domain-Specific Languages for Machine Learning in Big Data
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
The proliferation of data often called Big Data has created problems with traditional approaches to data capture, storage, analysis and visualization, thus opening up new areas of research. Machine Learning algorithms are one area that has been used in Big Data for analysis. However, because of the challenges Big Data imposes, these algorithms need to be adapted and optimized to specific applications. One important decision made by software engineers is the choice of the language that is used in the implementation of these algorithms. This literature survey identifies and describes domain-specific languages and frameworks used for Machine Learning in Big Data with the intention of assisting software engineers in making more informed choices and providing beginners with an overview of the main languages used in this domain. This is the first survey that aims at better understanding how domain-specific languages for Machine Learning are used as a tool for research in Big Data.
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 | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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