MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051020089 · doi:10.1080/09588220500173377

Search by Fuzzy Inference in a Children's Dictionary

2005· article· en· W2051020089 on OpenAlexaff
Claude St-Jacques, Caroline Barrière

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Assisted Language Learning · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVocabularyNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceLexical databaseInferenceInformation retrievalProcess (computing)Context (archaeology)Reading (process)Reading comprehensionLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims at promoting the usage of an online children's dictionary within a context of reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. Inspired by document retrieval approaches developed in the area of information retrieval (IR) research, we adapt a particular IR strategy, based on fuzzy logic, to a search in the electronic dictionary. From an unknown word, searched for by a learner, our proposed fuzzy inference process makes it possible to retrieve relevant lexical information from any entry of the dictionary. Furthermore, it organises this information in the form of semantic maps of an adaptable size surrounding the query word. Manual construction of such semantic maps are seen as being effective for helping learners in vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension tasks. Our research leads to a capability for building them automatically. Using concrete examples, we provide details of the calculation for the construction of semantic maps as well as for the retrieval of information. We introduce a software component which could be integrated in a computer assisted language learning (CALL) environment to promote vocabulary acquisition in L1.

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)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Assisted Language LearningSame topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207