Data repair of density-based data cleaning approach using conditional functional dependencies
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
Purpose Data quality is a major challenge in data management. For organizations, the cleanliness of data is a significant problem that affects many business activities. Errors in data occur for different reasons, such as violation of business rules. However, because of the huge amount of data, manual cleaning alone is infeasible. Methods are required to repair and clean the dirty data through automatic detection, which are data quality issues to address. The purpose of this work is to extend the density-based data cleaning approach using conditional functional dependencies to achieve better data repair. Design/methodology/approach A set of conditional functional dependencies is introduced as an input to the density-based data cleaning algorithm. The algorithm repairs inconsistent data using this set. Findings This new approach was evaluated through experiments on real-world as well as synthetic datasets. The repair quality was determined using the F -measure. The results showed that the quality and scalability of the density-based data cleaning approach improved when conditional functional dependencies were introduced. Originality/value Conditional functional dependencies capture semantic errors among data values. This work demonstrates that the density-based data cleaning approach can be improved in terms of repairing inconsistent data by using conditional functional dependencies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| 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