MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077409459 · doi:10.1504/ijamc.2008.018504

Keyword extraction rules based on a part-of-speech hierarchy

2008· article· en· W2077409459 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

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Media and Communication · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHierarchyNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceSentenceDomain (mathematical analysis)Set (abstract data type)Field (mathematics)Context (archaeology)Natural languageKeyword extractionNatural language understanding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we set out to present an original rule learning algorithm for symbolic Natural Language Processing (NLP), designed to learn the rules of extraction of keywords marked in its training sentences. What really sets our methodology apart from other recent developments in the field of NLP is the implementation of a hierarchy of parts-of-speech at the very core of the algorithm. This makes the rules dependent only on the sentence's structure rather than on context and domain-specific information. The theoretical development and the experimental results support the conclusion that this improved methodology can be used to obtain an in-depth analysis of the text without being limited to a single domain of application. Consequently, it has the advantage of outperforming both traditional statistical and symbolic NLP methodologies.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.291 · 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