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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the development of internet technology and computer science, data is exploding at an exponential rate. Big data brings us new opportunities and challenges. On the one hand, we can analyze and mine big data to discover hidden information and get more potential value. On the other hand, the 5V characteristic of big data, especially Volume which means large amount of data, brings challenges to storage and processing. For some traditional data mining algorithms, machine learning algorithms and data profiling tasks, it is very difficult to handle such a large amount of data. The large amount of data is highly demanding hardware resources and time consuming. Sampling methods can effectively reduce the amount of data and help speed up data processing. Sampling technology has been widely used in big data context. Data profiling is the activity that finds metadata of data set and has many use cases, e.g., performing data profiling tasks on relational data, graph data, and time series data for anomaly detection and data repair. However, data profiling is computationally expensive, especially for large data sets. Hence this article focuses on researching sampling for data profiling tasks in big data context and investigates the application of sampling in different categories of data profiling. From the experimental results of these studies, the results got from the sampled data are close to or even exceed the results of the full amount of data. Therefore, sampling technology plays an important role in the era of big data, and we also have reason to believe that sampling technology will become an indispensable step in big data processing in the future.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | medium |
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it