MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1904294760

Toward plWordNet 2.0

2010· article· en· W1904294760 on OpenAlexaff
Maciej Piasecki, Stanisław Szpakowicz, Bartosz Broda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWordNetComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingPlan (archaeology)Information retrievalHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three years in development, the first release of a Polish wordnet contains almost 27000 lexical units grouped into some 17700 synsets. We look back at this completed first stage of the project, beginning with its main assumptions. We reconsider the challenges; we show how well they have been met and how many remain for the future. We discuss the benefits of semi-automatic wordnet expansion based only on information extracted from corpora. Next, we outline the plan for another three years, now devoted to growth – in the size of the network and in the variety of the underlying semantic rela-

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207