Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current database technology and computer hardware allow us to gather, store, access, and manipulate massive volumes of raw data in an efficient and inexpensive manner. In addition, the amount of data collected and warehoused in all industries is growing every year at a phenomenal rate. Nevertheless, our ability to discover critical, non-obvious nuggets of useful information in data that could influence or help in the decision making process, is still limited. Knowledge discovery (KDD) and Data Mining (DM) is a new, multidisciplinary field that focuses on the overall process of information discovery from large volumes of data. The field combines database concepts and theory, machine learning, pattern recognition, statistics, artificial intelligence, uncertainty management, and high-performance computing. To remain competitive, businesses must apply data mining techniques such as classification, prediction, and clustering using tools such as neural networks, fuzzy logic, and decision trees to facilitate making strategic decisions on a daily basis. Knowledge Discovery for Business Information Systems contains a collection of 16 high quality articles written by experts in the KDD and DM field from the following countries: Austria, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, China (Hong Kong), Estonia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Poland, Singapore and USA.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.017 |
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".