MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889272789 · doi:10.14778/3229863.3236248

Tooling framework for instantiating natural language querying system

2018· article· en· W2889272789 on OpenAlexaff
Manasa Jammi, Jaydeep Sen, Ashish Mittal, Sagar Verma, Vardaan Pahuja, Rema Ananthanarayanan, Pranay Lohia, Hima Karanam, Diptikalyan Saha, Karthik Sankaranarayanan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSchema (genetic algorithms)Natural languageNatural language user interfaceQuery languageProgramming languageDatabase schemaInformation retrievalDatabaseSoftware engineeringDatabase designNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent times have seen a growing demand for natural language querying (NLQ) interfaces to retrieve information from the structured data sources such as knowledge bases. Using this interface, business users can directly interact with a database without the knowledge of the query language or the data schema. Our earlier work describes a natural language query engine called ATHENA which has several shortcoming around ease of use and compatibility with data stores, formats and flows. In this demonstration paper, we present a tooling framework to address these challenges so that one can instantiate an NLQ system with utmost ease. Our framework makes it easy and practically applicable to all NLIDB scenarios involving different sources of structured data, file formats, and ontologies to enable natural language querying on top of them with minimal human configuration. We present the tool design and the solution to the challenges towards building such a system and demonstrate its applicability in the medical domain.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207