MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387846857 · doi:10.1145/3583780.3615046

SAND: Semantic Annotation of Numeric Data in Web Tables

2023· article· en· W4387846857 on OpenAlexafffund
Y. Y. Su, Davood Rafiei, Amir Behrad Khorram Nazari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation retrievalSemantic WebAnnotationSemantic Web StackSemantic annotationGraphMargin (machine learning)Knowledge graphSocial Semantic WebSchema (genetic algorithms)Natural language processingArtificial intelligenceMachine learningTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large portion of quantitative information about entities is expressed as Web tables, and these tables often lack proper schema and annotation, which introduces challenges for the purpose of querying and analysis. In this paper, we introduce SAND, a novel approach for annotating numeric columns of Web tables by linking them to properties in a knowledge graph. Our approach relies only on the semantic information readily available in knowledge graphs and not on contextual information that can be missing or labelled data which may be difficult to obtain. We show that our approach can reliably detect both semantic types (e.g., height) and unit labels (e.g., Centimeter) when the semantic type is present in the knowledge graph. Our evaluation on real-world web tables shows that our method outperforms by a large margin, in terms of accuracy, some of the state-of-the-art approaches on semantic labeling and unit detection.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.330
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.137 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207