MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7140919854 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19240920

Ciência de dados 2.0: arquitetura computacional e orquestração de sistemas agênticos em ambiente fintech

2025· article· pt· W7140919854 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Oliveira Soares Cardoso, José Augusto Theodosio Pazetti

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicBig Data and Digital Economy
Canadian institutionsNorthwestern Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Data modelingScale (ratio)Stability (learning theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A consolidação de modelos de linguagem de grande escala (LLMs) e sistemas baseados em agentes autônomos redefine os fundamentos operacionais da Ciência de Dados contemporânea. Este estudo investiga a emergência da denominada Ciência de Dados 2.0 como paradigma arquitetural orientado à orquestração computacional, governança distribuída e otimização econômica de sistemas inteligentes. A pesquisa foi conduzida por meio de revisão sistemática estruturada segundo o protocolo PRISMA, contemplando publicações indexadas entre 2023 e 2026 nas bases IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, Scopus e arXiv. Os resultados evidenciam a transição de pipelines batch monolíticos para arquiteturas distribuídas baseadas em Data Mesh, Lakehouse transacional (Apache Iceberg), bancos vetoriais, Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), Feature Stores em tempo real e práticas de FinOps. Propõe-se o Framework O³ (Orquestração, Observabilidade e Otimização) como modelo integrador capaz de articular desempenho algorítmico, eficiência econômica, rastreabilidade e conformidade regulatória. A validação em estudo de caso aplicado em ambiente fintech orientado a crédito digital demonstra redução significativa de latência, otimização de custo por inferência e aumento da robustez decisional. Conclui-se que a Ciência de Dados 2.0 configura-se como disciplina arquitetural sistêmica, superando a abordagem centrada exclusivamente em modelagem estatística. Versão publicada na Revista Datapoint:https://www.fatecrl.edu.br/revista/datapoint/index.php/dp/article/view/6

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.007

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.227 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 topicBig Data and Digital EconomyFrench-language works237,207