Knowledge-Based Textual Inference via Parse-Tree Transformations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Textual inference is an important component in many applications for understanding natural language. Classical approaches to textual inference rely on logical representations for meaning, which may be regarded as "external" to the natural language itself. However, practical applications usually adopt shallower lexical or lexical-syntactic representations, which correspond closely to language structure. In many cases, such approaches lack a principled meaning representation and inference framework. We describe an inference formalism that operates directly on language-based structures, particularly syntactic parse trees. New trees are generated by applying inference rules, which provide a unified representation for varying types of inferences. We use manual and automatic methods to generate these rules, which cover generic linguistic structures as well as specific lexical-based inferences. We also present a novel packed data-structure and a corresponding inference algorithm that allows efficient implementation of this formalism. We proved the correctness of the new algorithm and established its efficiency analytically and empirically. The utility of our approach was illustrated on two tasks: unsupervised relation extraction from a large corpus, and the Recognizing Textual Entailment (RTE) benchmarks.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it