Knowledge Translation: Extended Technical Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce Kensho, a tool for generating mapping rules between two Knowledge Bases (KBs). To create the mapping rules, Kensho starts with a set of correspondences and enriches them with additional semantic information automatically identified from the structure and constraints of the KBs. Our approach works in two phases. In the first phase, semantic associations between resources of each KB are captured. In the second phase, mapping rules are generated by interpreting the correspondences in a way that respects the discovered semantic associations among elements of each KB. Kensho's mapping rules are expressed using SPARQL queries and can be used directly to exchange knowledge from source to target. Kensho is able to automatically rank the generated mapping rules using a set of heuristics. We present an experimental evaluation of Kensho and assess our mapping generation and ranking strategies using more than 50 synthesized and real world settings, chosen to showcase some of the most important applications of knowledge translation. In addition, we use three existing benchmarks to demonstrate Kensho's ability to deal with different mapping scenarios.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".