MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032597430 · doi:10.4018/ijdwm.2020070106

Conceptual Model and Design of Semantic Trajectory Data Warehouse

2020· article· en· W3032597430 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Mireku Kwakye

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData warehouseTrajectoryData miningGeospatial analysisContext (archaeology)OntologyInferenceObject (grammar)Semantic data modelInformation retrievalData modelingData scienceDatabaseArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trajectory patterns of a moving object in a spatio-temporal domain offers varied information in terms of the management of the data generated from the movement. The query results of trajectory objects from the data warehouse are usually not enough to answer certain trend behaviours and meaningful inferences without the associated semantic information of the trajectory object or the geospatial environment within a specified purpose or context. This article formulates and designs a generic ontology modelling framework that serves as the background model platform for the design of a semantic data warehouse for trajectories. The methodology underpins on higher granularity of data as a result of pre-processed and extract-transformed-load (ETL) data so as to offer efficient semantic inference to the underlying trajectory data. Moreover, the modelling approach outlines the thematic dimensions that offer a design platform for predictive trend analysis and knowledge discovery in the trajectory dynamics and data processing for moving objects.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.100 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data Warehousing and MiningSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207