MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103153231 · doi:10.1504/ijdmb.2012.048172

Re-ranking with context for high-performance biomedical information retrieval

2012· article· en· W2103153231 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 Data Mining and Bioinformatics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersU.S. National Library of Medicine
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)Context (archaeology)Information retrievalComputer scienceData scienceBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a context-sensitive approach to re-ranking retrieved documents for further improving the effectiveness of high-performance biomedical literature retrieval systems. For each topic, a two-dimensional positive context is learnt from the top N retrieved documents and a group of negative contexts are learnt from the last N' documents in initial retrieval ranked list. The contextual space contains lexical context and conceptual context. The probabilities that retrieved documents are generated within the contextual space are then computed for document re-ranking. Empirical evaluation on the TREC Genomics full-text collection and three high-performance biomedical literature retrieval runs demonstrates that the context-sensitive re-ranking approach yields better retrieval performance.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.266 · 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