MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072323150 · doi:10.1145/1277741.1277979

Geographic ranking for a local search engine

2007· article· en· W2072323150 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMinnow Environmental (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation retrievalRanking (information retrieval)Computer scienceRelevance (law)Web crawlerWeb search engineVolunteered geographic informationWorld Wide WebWeb pageGeographic information systemWeb search querySearch engineGeographyData scienceCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional ranking schemes of the relevance of a Web page to a user query in a search engine are less appropriate when the search term contains geographic information. Often, geographic entities, such as addresses, city names, and location names, appear only once or twice in a Web page, and are typically not in a heading or larger font. Consequently, an alternative ranking approach to the traditional weighted tf*idf relevance ranking is need. Further, if a Web site contains a geographic entity, it is often the case that its in- and out-neighbours do not refer to the same entity, although they may refer to other geographic entities. We present a local search engine that applies a novel ranking algorithm suitable for ranking Web pages with geographic content. We describe its major components: geographic ranking, focused crawling, geographic extractor, and the related web-sites feature.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.271
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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207