Data and AI Model Markets: Opportunities for Data and Model Sharing, Discovery, and Integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The markets for data and AI models are rapidly emerging and increasingly significant in the realm and the practices of data science and artificial intelligence. These markets are being studied from diverse perspectives, such as e-commerce, economics, machine learning, and data management. In light of these developments, there is a pressing need to present a comprehensive and forward-looking survey on the subject to the database and data management community. In this tutorial, we aim to provide a comprehensive and interdisciplinary introduction to data and AI model markets. Unlike a few recent surveys and tutorials that concentrate only on the economics aspect, we take a novel perspective and examine data and AI model markets as grand opportunities to address the long-standing problem of data and model sharing, discovery, and integration. We motivate the importance of data and model markets using practical examples, present the current industry landscape of such markets, and explore the modules and options of such markets from multiple dimensions, including assets in the markets (e.g., data versus models), platforms, and participants. Furthermore, we summarize the latest advancements and examine the future directions of data and AI model markets as mechanisms for enabling and facilitating sharing, discovery, and integration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".