Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40989321›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025

DLProv: a suite of provenance services for deep learning workflow analyses.

Débora Pina, Liliane Kunstmann, Adriane Chapman, Daniel de Oliveira, Marta Mattoso

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Débora PinaCOPPE Institute, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Liliane KunstmannCOPPE Institute, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Adriane ChapmanSchool of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3814-2587
Daniel de OliveiraInstitute of Computing, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-9346-7651
Marta MattosoCOPPE Institute, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0870-3371

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning (DL) workflows consist of multiple interdependent and repetitive steps, including data preparation, model training, evaluation, and deployment. Each step involves decisions impacting the final model's performance, interpretability, and applicability. These models rely on data, preprocessing operations, and configuration, underscoring the need for mechanisms to ease the analysis throughout the entire life cycle-from model generation and selection to deployment. Moreover, ensuring trust, reproducibility, and transparency becomes important as DL models transition into production environments. Traceability across the steps of the DL workflow is essential to address these challenges. However, existing traceability solutions often present limitations. Many fail to integrate the steps of the DL workflow, focusing on either data preparation or model training. Additionally, they frequently rely on proprietary formats to represent traceability data and rarely produce a provenance document that can accompany the model into production. To bridge these gaps, we present DLProv, a suite of provenance services designed to ensure end-to-end traceability across DL workflows. DLProv supports structured query language (SQL)-based querying during training and generates provenance graphs that capture data preparation steps, model training, and evaluation. These provenance graphs comply with the PROV

Indexed as

Deep learningProvenance dataProvenance graphTraceabilityW3C PROV

Identifiers

PMID40989321
PMCPMC12453841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.