MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174181760 · doi:10.1145/3448016.3450586

Temporal Dependencies for Graphs

2021· article· en· W3174181760 on OpenAlexaff
Morteza Alipourlangouri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGraph productProduct (mathematics)Knowledge graphRelational databaseTheoretical computer scienceInformation retrievalData miningGraphChordal graphMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphs are increasingly being used to model information about entities, their properties, and relationships between entities. Examples include relationships between customers, their product purchases, and inter-relationships between products. Many of these graphs are not static, and operate in dynamic data environments. Large-scale knowledge bases such as DBpedia, Yago, Wikidata, and Amazon product graphs operate in such dynamic environments, where Entities in these temporal graphs are constantly changing. Having accurate and complete information is critical for downstream decision making and fact checking. Data dependencies help us to preserve accuracy of the data and have been well studied for relational data and static graphs. However, the need for FDs is also evident for temporal graphs since they specify the semantic of the data to detect inconsistencies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.341
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207