MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309617049 · doi:10.1145/3571281

Efficiently Cleaning Structured Event Logs: A Graph Repair Approach

2022· article· en· W4309617049 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Database Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersBeijing National Research Center For Information Science And TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkflowEvent (particle physics)PruningData miningGraphProfiling (computer programming)Information retrievalTheoretical computer scienceDatabaseProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Event data are often dirty owing to various recording conventions or simply system errors. These errors may cause serious damage to real applications, such as inaccurate provenance answers, poor profiling results, or concealing interesting patterns from event data. Cleaning dirty event data is strongly demanded. While existing event data cleaning techniques view event logs as sequences, structural information does exist among events, such as the task passing relationships between staffs in workflow or the invocation relationships among different micro-services in monitoring application performance. We argue that such structural information enhances not only the accuracy of repairing inconsistent events but also the computation efficiency. It is notable that both the structure and the names (labeling) of events could be inconsistent. In real applications, while an unsound structure is not repaired automatically (which requires manual effort from business actors to handle the structure error), it is highly desirable to repair the inconsistent event names introduced by recording mistakes. In this article, we first prove that the inconsistent label repairing problem is NP-complete. Then, we propose a graph repair approach for (1) detecting unsound structures, and (2) repairing inconsistent event names. Efficient pruning techniques together with two heuristic solutions are also presented. Extensive experiments over real and synthetic datasets demonstrate both the effectiveness and efficiency of our proposal.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.242 · 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