MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084403289 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17246632

NeoModeling Framework: Leveraging Graph-Based Persistence for Large-Scale Model-Driven Engineering (replication package)

2025· dataset· en· W7084403289 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Source codeReplication (statistics)LoaderCode (set theory)R packageData setCloud computingRunning time

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the replication package for the paper "NeoModeling Framework: Leveraging Graph-Based Persistence for Large-Scale Model-Driven Engineering" where we present Neo Modeling Framework (NMF), an open-source set of tools primarily designed to manipulate ultra-large datasets in the Neo4j database. Repository structure NeoModelingFramework.zip - contains the replication package, including the source code for NMF, test files to run the evaluation, used artifacts, and instructions to run the framework. The most import folders are listed below: codeGenerator - NMF generator module modelLoader - NMF loader module modelEditor - NMF editor module Evaluation - contains the evaluation artifacts and results (a copy metamodels - Ecore files used for RQ1 and RQ2 results - CSV files with the results from RQ1, RQ2 and RQ3 analysis - Jupyter notebooks used to analyze and plot the results Running NMF The best way to run NMF is following the instructions at our GitHub repository. A copy of the Readme file is also present inside the zip file available here. Empirical Evaluation Make sure that you follow the instructions to run NMF. The quantitative evaluation can be re-run by running RQ1Eval.kt, RQ2Eval.kt inside modelLoader/src/test/kotlin/evaluation and RQ2Eval.kt inside modelEditor/src/test/kotlin/evaluation. Make sure that you have an empty instance of Neo4j running. Results will be generated as CSV files, under Evaluation/results and the results can be plotted by running the Jupyter Notebooks at Evaluation/analysis. Please note that due to differences in hardware, re-running the experiments will probably generate slightly different results than those reported in the paper.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207