MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798664493 · doi:10.14778/3192965.3192973

Table union search on open data

2018· article· en· W2798664493 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable (database)Computer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Data miningSet (abstract data type)Semantic searchDomain (mathematical analysis)OntologyDecision tableProbabilistic logicInformation retrievalSearch engineArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We define the table union search problem and present a probabilistic solution for finding tables that are unionable with a query table within massive repositories. Two tables are unionable if they share attributes from the same domain. Our solution formalizes three statistical models that describe how unionable attributes are generated from set domains, semantic domains with values from an ontology, and natural language domains. We propose a data-driven approach that automatically determines the best model to use for each pair of attributes. Through a distribution-aware algorithm, we are able to find the optimal number of attributes in two tables that can be unioned. To evaluate accuracy, we created and open-sourced a benchmark of Open Data tables. We show that our table union search outperforms in speed and accuracy existing algorithms for finding related tables and scales to provide efficient search over Open Data repositories containing more than one million attributes.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0100.013
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 head0.481
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.008 · 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