MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410187497 · doi:10.63278/1487

Synthetic Cognition Meets Data Deluge: Architecting Agentic AI Models for Self-Regulating Knowledge Graphs in Heterogeneous Data Warehousing

2025· article· en· W4410187497 on OpenAlex
Srinivas Kalyan Yellanki, Dwaraka Nath Kummari, Goutham Kumar Sheelam, S. Kannan, Chaitran Chakilam

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

VenueMetallurgical and Materials Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData warehouseKnowledge graphCognitionData scienceMaterials scienceComputer scienceData miningArtificial intelligenceNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The realities of contemporary data management and representation are evolving at an increasing rate. However, we still lack the broad foundational bridges of core data warehousing principles relating to how high-level reports are generated internally so that users can psychologically intuit where they are in the vast and complex repository of data that resides in a typical data warehouse. IT workers must constantly support users or worry about failed ad-hoc or automated operations or whose results appear without explanation. Data management may not yet exist as a science. We need a more complete transformational view of the details of the internal mappings between data from diverse sources and conceptual data model object types. Cognitive model-driven and symbolic techniques have been approached to design and develop systems to automate and rationalize these transformational processes and to support user navigation and work. These techniques are now being displaced by advanced statistical learning methods. As designed, these methods mostly do knowledge creation in the basic steps of the transformational process, but they likewise at times pave data as well. Through AI as Intentional Cognition supplemented by language, this inhibition may be bypassed. Thus, despite both their synthetic and agentic capabilities, these approaches follow a surprising and quite diverse transition. The goal of this work is to show what tasks of data management and representation these methods might be able to tackle and when and how they might interleave towards a more collaborative AI Data Management. We conclude with directions for future work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.245 · 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