MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027081355 · doi:10.3115/1699648.1699697

Character-level analysis of semi-structured documents for set expansion

2009· article· en· W2027081355 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Richard C. Wang, William W. Cohen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAssociation of Canadian Universities for Research in Astronomy
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Seal (emblem)Computer scienceCharacter (mathematics)Independence (probability theory)Artificial intelligenceCharacter encodingNatural language processingProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Set expansion refers to expanding a partial set of "seed" objects into a more complete set. One system that does set expansion is SEAL (Set Expander for Any Language), which expands entities automatically by utilizing resources from the Web in a language-independent fashion. In this paper, we illustrated in detail the construction of character-level wrappers for set expansion implemented in SEAL. We also evaluated several kinds of wrappers for set expansion and showed that character-based wrappers perform better than HTML-based wrappers. In addition, we demonstrated a technique that extends SEAL to learn binary relational concepts (e.g., "x is the mayor of the city y") from only two seeds. We also show that the extended SEAL has good performance on our evaluation datasets, which includes English and Chinese, thus demonstrating language-independence.

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)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations40
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207