Bibliographic record
Abstract
Big data analytics and mining aims to discover implicit, previously unknown, and potentially useful information and knowledge from big data sets that contain huge volumes of valuable veracious data collected or generated at a high velocity from a wide variety of rich data sources. Among different big data analytic and mining tasks, this chapter focuses on frequent pattern mining. By relying on the MapReduce programming model, researchers only need to specify the “map” and “reduce” functions to discover (organizational) knowledge from (i) big data sets of precise data in a breadth-first manner or depth-first manner and/or from (ii) big data sets of uncertain data. Such a big data analytics process can be sped up by focusing the mining according to the user-specified constraints that express the user interests. The resulting (constrained or unconstrained) frequent patterns mined from big data sets provide users with new insights and a sound understanding of users' patterns. Such (organizational) knowledge is useful is many real-life information science and technology applications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.029 |
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".