Data repair of density-based data cleaning approach using conditional functional dependencies
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".