MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967654850 · doi:10.14778/1687627.1687642

Measure-driven keyword-query expansion

2009· article· en· W1967654850 on OpenAlexaff
Nikos Sarkas, Nilesh Bansal, Gautam Das, Nick Koudas

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceExploitPruningInformation retrievalQuery expansionWeb search queryContext (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Process (computing)Domain (mathematical analysis)Measure (data warehouse)Focus (optics)Query optimizationData miningWord (group theory)Search engineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

User generated content has been fueling an explosion in the amount of available textual data. In this context, it is also common for users to express, either explicitly (through numerical ratings) or implicitly, their views and opinions on products, events, etc. This wealth of textual information necessitates the development of novel searching and data exploration paradigms. In this paper we propose a new searching model, similar in spirit to faceted search, that enables the progressive refinement of a keyword-query result. However, in contrast to faceted search which utilizes domain-specific and hard-to-extract document attributes, the refinement process is driven by suggesting interesting expansions of the original query with additional search terms. Our query-driven and domain-neutral approach employs surprising word co-occurrence patterns and (optionally) numerical user ratings in order to identify meaningful top- k query expansions and allow one to focus on a particularly interesting subset of the original result set. The proposed functionality is supported by a framework that is computationally efficient and nimble in terms of storage requirements. Our solution is grounded on Convex Optimization principles that allow us to exploit the pruning opportunities offered by the natural top- k formulation of our problem. The performance benefits offered by our solution are verified using both synthetic data and large real data sets comprised of blog posts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207