Filtering and Storing User Preferred Data: an Apache Spark Based Approach
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
This work-in-progress paper focuses on a filtering technique based on user preferences. It uses parallel processing and machine learning to effectively filter out user preferred data from a large raw data set. Although large volumes of data are generated, a user is often interested in only a select type (classes) of such data. The motivation behind this research is to devise an effective and efficient filtering technique for extracting user preferred data from large data sets. Storing only filtered data and discarding the remaining data can decrease latency in searching for specific information within a data set. It can also decrease the size of the storage required for storing these data. Such a filtering method that uses data classification techniques can give rise to high processing latencies. An algorithm and system that use both parallel processing and machine learning are presented. A proof-of-concept prototype is built on the Apache Spark parallel processing platform. Analysis of the results of preliminary experiments demonstrates the viability of the investigated technique.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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