MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1886218757 · doi:10.1109/icdm.2002.1183904

Phrase-based document similarity based on an index graph model

2003· article· en· W1886218757 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled M. Hammouda, Mohamed S. Kamel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDocument clusteringCluster analysisPhraseVector space modelInformation retrievalGraphSimilarity (geometry)Matching (statistics)Set (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Document clustering techniques mostly rely on single term analysis of the document data set, such as the vector space model. To better capture the structure of documents, the underlying data model should be able to represent the phrases in the document as well as single terms. We present a novel data model, the document index graph, which indexes web documents based on phrases, rather than single terms only. The semi-structured web documents help in identifying potential phrases that when matched with other documents indicate strong similarity between the documents. The document index graph captures this information, and finding significant matching phrases between documents becomes easy and efficient with such model. The similarity between documents is based on both single term weights and matching phrases weights. The combined similarities are used with standard document clustering techniques to test their effect on the clustering quality. Experimental results show that our phrase-based similarity, combined with single-term similarity measures, enhances web document clustering quality significantly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations73
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207