A Variability-Aware Design Approach to the Data Analysis Modeling Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The massive amount of current data has led to many different forms of data analysis processes that aim to explore this data to uncover valuable insights. Methodologies to guide the development of big data science projects, including CRISP-DM and SEMMA, have been widely used in industry and academia. The data analysis modeling phase, which involves decisions on the most appropriate models to adopt, is at the core of these projects. However, from a software engineering perspective, the design and automation of activities performed in this phase are challenging. In this paper, we propose an approach to the data analysis modeling process which involves (i) the assessment of the variability inherent in the CRISP-DM data analysis modeling phase and the provision of feature models that represent this variability; (ii) the definition of a framework structural design that captures the identified variability; and (iii) evaluation of the developed framework design in terms of the possibilities for process automation. The proposed approach advances the state of the art by offering a variability-aware design solution that can enhance system flexibility, potentially leading to novel software frameworks which can significantly improve the level of automation in data analysis modeling process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".