Short-Text Clustering using Statistical Semantics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short documents are typically represented by very sparse vectors, in the space of terms. In this case, traditional techniques for calculating text similarity results in measures which are very close to zero, since documents even the very similar ones have a very few or mostly no terms in common. In order to alleviate this limitation, the representation of short-text segments should be enriched by incorporating information about correlation between terms. In other words, if two short segments do not have any common words, but terms from the first segment appear frequently with terms from the second segment in other documents, this means that these segments are semantically related, and their similarity measure should be high. Towards achieving this goal, we employ a method for enhancing document clustering using statistical semantics. However, the problem of high computation time arises when calculating correlation between all terms. In this work, we propose the selection of a few terms, and using these terms with the Nystr\"om method to approximate the term-term correlation matrix. The selection of the terms for the Nystr\"om method is performed by randomly sampling terms with probabilities proportional to the lengths of their vectors in the document space. This allows more important terms to have more influence on the approximation of the term-term correlation matrix and accordingly achieves better accuracy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".