MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784252969

OLAP Cube Approximation and Rule Generation in Data Warehouses

2006· article· en· W2784252969 on OpenAlexaff
Sami Naouali, Rokia Missaoui

Bibliographic record

VenueE-ti · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnline analytical processingComputer scienceData warehouseCube (algebra)Data cubeTupleSet (abstract data type)Matching (statistics)Data miningApproximation algorithmMode (computer interface)Focus (optics)DatabaseInformation retrievalAlgorithmMathematicsDiscrete mathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach toward approximate query answering in data warehouses. The approach is based on an adaptation of rough set theory to multidimensional data, and offers cube exploration and mining facilities. The objective of this work is to integrate approximation mechanisms and associated operators into data cubes in order to produce views that can then be explored using OLAP or data mining techniques. The integration of data approximation capabilities with OLAP techniques offers additional facilities for cube exploration and analysis. The proposed approach allows the user to work either in a restricted mode using a cube lower approximation or in a relaxed mode using cube upper approximation . The former mode is useful when the query output is large, and hence allows the user to focus on a reduced set of fully matching tuples. The latter is useful when a query returns an empty or small answer set, and hence helps relax the query conditions so that a superset of the answer is returned.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-tiSame topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207