Ontology Enhanced Concept Hierarchies for Text Identification
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
The Internet holds huge amount of documents available for users. Effective utilization of this enormous repository means a need for systems supporting users in a process of finding related documents. An ontology defined in the framework of the Semantic Web (Berners, 2001) allows for specification of concepts, their instances, and relationships existing between concepts. A hierarchy of concepts (Yager, 2000) is a graph-like structure providing a means for representing human-like dependencies. The article proposes an approach for utilization of a hierarchy of concepts to perform categorization of web pages in the Semantic Web. A user provides a hierarchy that can only partially “cover” their domain of interest. The hierarchy is treated as a “seed” representing user’s initial knowledge about the domain. Ontologies are treated as supplementary knowledge bases. They are used to instantiate the hierarchy with concrete information, as well as to enhance it with new concepts initially unknown to a user.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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