MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Design Approach to Handle Spatial Vagueness in Spatial OLAP Datacubes

2016· book-chapter· en· W4246953364 on OpenAlexaff
Élodie Edoh-Alove, Sandro Bimonte, François Pinet, Yvan Bédard

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnline analytical processingVaguenessComputer scienceSpatial analysisMetadataData miningInformation retrievalData scienceFuzzy logicGeographyData warehouseArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatial-OLAP (SOLAP) technologies are dedicated to multidimensional analysis of large volumes of (spatial) data. Spatial data are subject to different types of uncertainty, in particular spatial vagueness. Although several researches propose new models to cope with spatial vagueness, their integration in SOLAP systems is still in an embryonic state. Also, analyzing multidimensional data with metadata brought by the exploitation of the new models can be too complex and demanding for decision-makers. To help reduce spatial vagueness consequences on the exactness of SOLAP analysis queries, the authors present a new approach for designing SOLAP datacubes based on end-users' tolerance to the risks of misinterpretation of fact data. An experimentation of the new approach on agri-environmental data is also proposed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207