ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Knowledge representation remains a central challenge for reasoning-centered artificial intelligence, particularly when semantic structures involve relations over relations, contextual annotations, and recursively nested descriptions. This paper introduces Views, a recursively labeled graph database (GDB) model designed to represent such graph-structured knowledge within a uniform graph abstraction while retaining a hardware-aware organization for associative search and traversal. Methods: The model refactors directed labeled graphs into linked-list-like chains of linknodes, supports recursive labeling of vertices and edges, and admits mappings from Resource Description Framework (RDF)- and labeled property graph (LPG)-style graph representations. We describe the data structure, its hardware-oriented memory mappings under the Associative Chip Architecture (ASOCA), and selected associative operations for retrieval over Views-based GDBs. We then evaluate storage footprint under stated mapping and store boundaries using three scales of the Social Network Benchmark published by the Linked Data Benchmark Council, and characterize directed K-hop traversal on an Associative Memory Chip III (ASOCA3) field-programmable gate array (FPGA) implementation. Results: The storage results show that allocation and entry width materially affect the reported footprints rather than establishing an intrinsic advantage for Views, while the K-hop measurements show increasing mean returned-vertex count and mean latency with hop bound over the fixed resident graph image. Worked semantic-reasoning and Copycat-inspired examples further illustrate how retrieval operations can be composed over the model, rather than providing application-level reasoning or cognitive validation. Discussion: Taken together, these results position Views as a model-architecture co-design for associative storage and selected graph traversal under the stated conditions; broader database workloads and end-to-end reasoning applications remain to be evaluated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.