A LDA-based approach to promoting ranking diversity for genomics information retrieval
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the biomedical domain, there are immense data and tremendous increase of genomics and biomedical relevant publications. The wealth of information has led to an increasing amount of interest in and need for applying information retrieval techniques to access the scientific literature in genomics and related biomedical disciplines. In many cases, the desired information of a query asked by biologists is a list of a certain type of entities covering different aspects that are related to the question, such as cells, genes, diseases, proteins, mutations, etc. Hence, it is important of a biomedical IR system to be able to provide relevant and diverse answers to fulfill biologists' information needs. However traditional IR model only concerns with the relevance between retrieved documents and user query, but does not take redundancy between retrieved documents into account. This will lead to high redundancy and low diversity in the retrieval ranked lists. RESULTS: In this paper, we propose an approach which employs a topic generative model called Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to promoting ranking diversity for biomedical information retrieval. Different from other approaches or models which consider aspects on word level, our approach assumes that aspects should be identified by the topics of retrieved documents. We present LDA model to discover topic distribution of retrieval passages and word distribution of each topic dimension, and then re-rank retrieval results with topic distribution similarity between passages based on N-size slide window. We perform our approach on TREC 2007 Genomics collection and two distinctive IR baseline runs, which can achieve 8% improvement over the highest Aspect MAP reported in TREC 2007 Genomics track. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed method is the first study of adopting topic model to genomics information retrieval, and demonstrates its effectiveness in promoting ranking diversity as well as in improving relevance of ranked lists of genomics search. Moreover, we proposes a distance measure to quantify how much a passage can increase topical diversity by considering both topical importance and topical coefficient by LDA, and the distance measure is a modified Euclidean distance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".