Advances in Big Data and Data Mining: Techniques and Applications in Data Fusion for Enhanced Insights and Decision-Making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Big data's explosive growth has transformed several businesses by making it possible to glean insightful information from big, complex databases. This study examines new developments in big data and data mining methods, concentrating on data fusion as a means of improving decision-making. Data fusion, the act of combining many data sources to get more accurate and thorough insights, is becoming essential in industries including cybersecurity, healthcare, finance, and marketing. The study looks at how cutting-edge data mining methods, such as anomaly detection, classification, and clustering, might increase the efficiency of data fusion. Important issues are also covered, including managing heterogeneous data, guaranteeing data quality, and scalability. This paper shows how data fusion approaches may enhance decision-making processes by offering more comprehensive perspectives and useful insights via an analysis of real-world applications. The paper's conclusion discusses potential future developments, emphasising how machine learning and artificial intelligence may be used to improve data mining and fusion procedures, potentially leading to even higher levels of precision and effectiveness in decision-making across a range of industries.
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 | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".