MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767154063 · doi:10.1109/iccsnt.2016.8070282

Semantic ontology of knowledge on ethnic groups in Thailand

2016· article· en· W2767154063 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Juthatip Chaikhambung, Kulthida Tuamsuk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHumanities Research Group, University of Windsor
KeywordsOntologyComputer scienceUpper ontologyOntology-based data integrationEthnic groupBody of knowledgeScope (computer science)Process ontologyKnowledge-based systemsKnowledge extractionSuggested Upper Merged OntologyInformation retrievalKnowledge managementNatural language processingSemantic WebArtificial intelligenceSociologyEpistemologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the semantic ontology of knowledge on ethnic groups in Thailand. The ontology was developed from knowledge structure that was derived by content analysis using classification theory. The obtained knowledge structure was used to develop the ontology grounded by the ontology development procedures. Accordingly, a lexical system was assigned to represent knowledge and knowledge scope, which clearly reveal a body of more advanced and clearer knowledge on ethnic groups in Thailand. The constructed ontology can be used as a basis to develop knowledge based systems, semantic search systems, or semantic digital libraries on the knowledge of ethnic groups in Thailand.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.292
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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207