MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1539683106 · doi:10.21236/ada458694

Construction of Chinese-English Semantic Hierarchy for Information Retrieval

2000· report· en· W1539683106 on OpenAlexafffund
Gina‐Anne Levow, Bonnie J. Dorr, Dekang Lin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsHierarchyComputer scienceInformation retrievalNatural language processingArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an approach to large-scale construction of a semantic\nhierarchy for Chinese verbs. Leveraging off of an existing Chinese\nconceptual database called HowNet and a Levin-based English verb\nclassification, we use thematic-role information to create links between\nChinese concepts and English classes. The resulting hierarchy is used for\nmultilingual lexicons in an English-Chinese cross-language information\nretrieval application. We demonstrate a structured syntax interface that\nexploits this large-scale hierarchy and its linkages to WordNet for\nEnglish-Chinese cross-language information retrieval.\n(Also cross-referenced asUMIACS-TR-2000-36)\n(Also cross-referenced as LAMP-TR-043)

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207