MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246292764 · doi:10.1504/ijipt.2016.10002231

K-CEP: a knowledge-based complex event processing framework to manage qualitative spatiotemporal patterns

2016· article· en· W4246292764 on OpenAlexaff
Foued Barouni, Bernard Moulin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Internet Protocol Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComplex event processingLeverage (statistics)SQLData miningEvent (particle physics)Data scienceDatabaseMachine learningProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a framework for managing qualitative spatiotemporal patterns. Our framework is designed for large scale monitoring systems. Such systems generate a huge amount of real-time data in various formats. End-users are interested in finding significant data configurations based on their expertise and attempt to leverage the large amounts of data generated by acquisition systems. Several software tools have been proposed to help users achieve such goals. However, available solutions are mostly based on relational databases and use SQL queries to support such functionalities. These systems do not allow for real-time detection of situations of interest (also called 'patterns' in this domain) due to the weak expressiveness of SQL queries. We present a novel approach based on complex event processing for the real-time detection of situations of interest based on events, states and spatial objects. We leverage the rich semantics of a qualitative pattern representation model to present a complete solution to qualitatively represent patterns and to detect their instances from the event cloud. Thanks to our approach, a user will be able to react to detected patterns instead of trying to identify ('to mine') patterns in databases as it is proposed in current approaches.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.366 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Internet Protocol TechnologySame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207