MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951098179 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n7p1

A Comparative Study on Big Data Analytics Frameworks, Data Resources and Challenges

2019· article· en· W2951098179 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Flasteen Abuqabita, Razan Al-Omoush, Jaber Alwidian

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Stream Mining Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBig dataAnalyticsData scienceData analysisSoftware analyticsData processingData miningDatabaseSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, huge amount of data has been generated in all over the world; these data are very huge, extremely fast and varies in its type. In order to extract the value from this data and make sense of it, a lot of frameworks and tools are needed to be developed for analyzing it. Until now a lot of tools and frameworks were generated to capture, store, analyze and visualize it. In this study we categorized the existing frameworks which is used for processing the big data into three groups, namely as, Batch processing, Stream analytics and Interactive analytics, we discussed each of them in detailed and made comparison on each of them.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.014
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicData Stream Mining TechniquesFrench-language works237,207