MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117764744 · doi:10.3390/make8010006

Research Frontiers in Machine Learning & Knowledge Extraction

2025· article· en· W7117764744 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Holzinger, Angelo Cangelosi, Javier Del Ser

Bibliographic record

VenueMachine Learning and Knowledge Extraction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEusko JaurlaritzaAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsTransparency (behavior)UnderpinningSoftware deploymentCornerstoneApplications of artificial intelligenceEmbeddingDomain (mathematical analysis)Knowledge integration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction have evolved from algorithmic tools for pattern recognition into a unifying foundational scientific framework underpinning virtually all of today’s groundbreaking advances, enabling systematic discovery, interpretation and understanding across domains. This paper introduces a comprehensive research agenda that defines currently the future of innovation in Artificial Intelligence. We identify ten interrelated research frontiers that collectively map the transition from data-driven learning to knowledge-centric, trustworthy, and sustainable intelligence. These frontiers span the full spectrum of future AI research: from physics-informed and hybrid architectures that embed causality and domain knowledge, to multimodal and embedded intelligence that ground AI in real-world contexts; from interpretable and responsible design principles that ensure transparency and fairness, to safe and sustainable deployment in open-world environments. Together, these directions delineate a coherent roadmap toward AI systems that not only predict but also explain, reason, and collaborate. Future AI can be seen as a new member of your research lab, an active participant in knowledge creation, driven by interdisciplinary integration, global cooperation, ethical responsibility, and human oversight. By embedding principles of transparency, sustainability, and societal alignment from the outset, we envision AI as both a catalyst for scientific discovery and a cornerstone of responsible technological progress.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.019
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMachine Learning and Knowledge ExtractionSame topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207