MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083253814 · doi:10.1145/584955.584983

Creating a massive master index for HTML and print

2002· article· en· W2083253814 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Scott, Ronnie Seagren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraftIndex (typography)Computer scienceUSableInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An index connects readers with information. Creating an index for a single book is a time-honored craft. Creating an index for a massive library of HTML topics is a modern craft that has largely been discarded in favor of robust search engines. The authors show how they optimized a single-sourced index for collections of HTML topics, printed books, and PDF books. With examples from a recent index of 24,000 entries for 7,000 distinct HTML topics also published as 40 different PDF books, the authors discuss the connections between modern technology and traditional information retrieval methods that made the index possible, usable, and efficient to create and maintain.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0160.015
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0110.020
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1440.145

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.144 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationFrench-language works237,207