MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400875444 · doi:10.3390/computers13070183

Data Lakes: A Survey of Concepts and Architectures

2024· article· en· W4400875444 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

VenueComputers · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersMinistry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
KeywordsData scienceSurvey data collectionComputer scienceGeographyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive literature review on the evolution of data-lake technology, with a particular focus on data-lake architectures. By systematically examining the existing body of research, we identify and classify the major types of data-lake architectures that have been proposed and implemented over time. The review highlights key trends in the development of data-lake architectures, identifies the primary challenges faced in their implementation, and discusses future directions for research and practice in this rapidly evolving field. We have developed diagrammatic representations to highlight the evolution of various architectures. These diagrams use consistent notations across all architectures to further enhance the comparative analysis of the different architectural components. We also explore the differences between data warehouses and data lakes. Our findings provide valuable insights for researchers and practitioners seeking to understand the current state of data-lake technology and its potential future trajectory.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.390
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.098 · 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