REVIEW 1 cited by
Exploring LLM Capabilities in Extracting DCAT-Compatible Metadata for Data Cataloging
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Exploring LLM Capabilities in Extracting DCAT-Compatible Metadata for Data Cataloging
read the original abstract
Efficient data exploration is crucial as data becomes increasingly important for accelerating processes, improving forecasts and developing new business models. Data consumers often spend 25-98 % of their time searching for suitable data due to the exponential growth, heterogeneity and distribution of data. Data catalogs can support and accelerate data exploration by using metadata to answer user queries. However, as metadata creation and maintenance is often a manual process, it is time-consuming and requires expertise. This study investigates whether LLMs can automate metadata maintenance of text-based data and generate high-quality DCAT-compatible metadata. We tested zero-shot and few-shot prompting strategies with LLMs from different vendors for generating metadata such as titles and keywords, along with a fine-tuned model for classification. Our results show that LLMs can generate metadata comparable to human-created content, particularly on tasks that require advanced semantic understanding. Larger models outperformed smaller ones, and fine-tuning significantly improves classification accuracy, while few-shot prompting yields better results in most cases. Although LLMs offer a faster and reliable way to create metadata, a successful application requires careful consideration of task-specific criteria and domain context.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
AgentFAIR: A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework for FAIRness Evaluation of Geospatial Datasets
A multi-agent LLM system with critic retries scores FAIR compliance of geospatial datasets at about five cents each, with 89% repeated-run agreement and 82% expert-label alignment in a small pilot.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.