Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time-biased gain provides a general framework for predicting user performance on information retrieval systems, capturing the impact of the user's interaction with the system's interface. Our prior work investigated an instantiation of time-biased gain aimed at traditional search interfaces utilizing clickable result summaries, with gain realized from the recognition of relevant documents. In this paper, we examine additional properties of time-biased gain, demonstrating how it generalizes effectiveness measures from across the field of information retrieval. We explore a new instantiation of time-biased gain, applicable to systems where the user judges the quality of their experience by the amount of time well spent. Rather than the single number produced by traditional effectiveness measures, time-biased gain models user variability and produces a distribution of gain on a per-query basis. With this distribution, we can observe performance differences at the user level. We apply bootstrap sampling to estimate confidence intervals across multiple queries.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.017 |
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 it