MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Measurement Ontology Generalizable for Emerging Domain Applications on the Semantic Web

2009· book-chapter· en· W4298359381 on OpenAlexaff
Henry Kim, Arijit Sengupta, Mark S. Fox, Mehmet Dalkılıç

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in database research (ADR) book series/Advances in database research series · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOntologySemantic WebSemantic analyticsUpper ontologyInformation retrievalOWL-SOpen Biomedical OntologiesSocial Semantic WebOntology-based data integrationSemantic Web StackProcess ontologyDomain (mathematical analysis)World Wide WebData scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a measurement ontology for applications to semantic Web applications, specifically for emerging domains such as microarray analysis. The semantic Web is the next-generation Web of structured data that are automatically shared by software agents, which apply definitions and constraints organized in ontologies to correctly process data from disparate sources. One facet needed to develop semantic Web ontologies of emerging domains is creating ontologies of concepts that are common to these domains. These general, “common-sense” ontologies can be used as building blocks to develop more domain-specific ontologies. However most measurement ontologies concentrate on representing units of measurement and quantities, and not on other measurement concepts such as sampling, mean values, and evaluations of quality based on measurements. In this paper, we elaborate on a measurement ontology that represents all these concepts. We present the generality of the ontology, and describe how it is developed, used for analysis and validated.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.014
Open science0.0090.005
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.291 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in database research (ADR) book series/Advances in database research seriesSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207