MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Representation of Web Application Patterns in OWL

2006· book-chapter· en· W2505032601 on OpenAlexaff
Pankaj Kamthan, Hsueh-Ieng Pai

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantic WebOWL-SOntologyOntology engineeringWeb Ontology LanguageKnowledge representation and reasoningRepresentation (politics)Domain (mathematical analysis)Process (computing)Software engineeringWorld Wide WebData scienceSocial Semantic WebArtificial intelligenceProcess ontologyProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patterns are distilled forms of knowledge from past experience and expertise in solving recurring problems in a domain. The Semantic Web provides an environment where the knowledge inherent in patterns can be adequately represented to be broadly accessible and be reasoned with. This chapter describes the process of creating OWAP, an ontology in the language OWL for Web Application Patterns. The problems faced in each phase and steps taken to resolve them are given. The significance and limitations of tools during OWAP design, implementation, and testing are outlined. The lessons learned in engineering OWAP are cast as an aggregated list of guidelines. Finally, some directions for future enhancements of OWAP are pointed out.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207