Mapping Relational Database to OWL Ontology Based on MDE Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontology is an important aspect of the semantic web, which is why semantic web developers are interested in constructing ontology in various applications based on domain experts. By transforming an existing application database into ontology, we many construct ontologies without having to hire an expert in the field. Model-driven engineering is the foundation of the suggested strategy (MDE). In a nutshell, the technique is divided into two phases, the first of which attempts to prepare the data needed for the transformation in the form of a model with a database. A compliance relationship between this model and its meta-model is required. Phase (2) applies a set of rules written in the Atlas Transformational Language to change the model produced in the first phase into another model, which is an OWL ontology (ATL). We tested our solution using a set of databases created specifically for this purpose and built it in an eclipse environment using an EMF and ATL transform language. The acquired findings demonstrate the strength and efficacy of the recommended strategy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".