MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1878790362 · doi:10.3390/ijms232113127

Overview of the TREC 2012 Contextual Suggestion Track.

2012· article· en· W1878790362 on OpenAlexaff
Adriel Dean-Hall, Charles L. A. Clarke, Jaap Kamps, Paul Thomas, Ellen M Voorhes

Bibliographic record

VenueText REtrieval Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)Information retrievalTask (project management)Set (abstract data type)World Wide WebData scienceGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1.1 Summary for Previous Participants For participants familiar with the 2012 Contextual Suggestion Track we have provided a list of the main changes to this year’s track: • Contexts no longer include a temporal component (day of week, time of day, and season), contexts

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4830.345

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueText REtrieval ConferenceSame topicInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorFrench-language works237,207