MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spatial Online Analytical Processing (SOLAP)

2007· book-chapter· en· W2490635813 on OpenAlexaff
Yvan Bédard, Sonia Rivest, Marie-Josée Proulx

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnline analytical processingGeospatial analysisComputer scienceSpatial analysisGeographic coordinate systemGeolocationGeographic information systemPoint (geometry)Data miningQuadtreeComponent (thermodynamics)GeographyCartographyInformation retrievalData warehouseWorld Wide WebRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is recognized that 80% of data have a spatial component (ex. street address, place name, geographic coordinates, map coordinates). Having the possibilities to display data on maps, to compare maps of different phenomena or epochs, and to combine maps with tables and statistical charts allows one to get more insights into spatial datasets. Furthermore, performing fast spatio-temporal analysis, interactively exploring the data by drilling on maps similarly to drilling on tables and charts, and easily synchronizing such operations among these views is nowadays required by more and more users. This can be done by combining Geographical Information Systems (GIS) with On-Line Analytical Processing (OLAP), paving the way to “SOLAP” (Spatial OLAP). The present chapter focuses on the spatial characteristics of SOLAP from a geomatics engineering point of view: concepts, architectures, tools and remaining challenges.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.016

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207