MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Theories of Meaning in Schema Matching

2009· book-chapter· en· W86593375 on OpenAlexaff
Jöerg Evermann

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchema matchingSchema (genetic algorithms)Matching (statistics)Conceptual schemaComputer scienceEpistemologySchema migrationInformation retrievalDatabase schemaPsychologyData miningData integrationSemi-structured modelSocial psychologyGender schema theoryMathematicsPhilosophyDatabase design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schema matching is the identification of database elements with similar meaning as preparation for subsequent database integration. Over the past 20 years, different schema-matching methods have been proposed and have been shown to be successful to various degrees. However, schema matching is an ongoing research area and the problem is not yet considered to be solved. This article reviews existing schema-matching methods from the perspective of theories of meanings drawn from philosophy and psychology. It positions existing methods, raises questions for future research based on these theories, and shows how these theories can form a firm theoretical basis as well as guide future schema-matching research.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207