MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106900819 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2002.994040

Adaptive user modeling for filtering electronic news

2003· article· en· W2106900819 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Shepherd, Carolyn Watters, Ashwathy Marath

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNewspaperArtificial neural networkUser modelingTask (project management)Quality (philosophy)User profileAdaptive systemTest (biology)Information retrievalMultimediaArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebUser interfaceAdvertisingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A prototype system for the fine-grained filtering of news items has been developed and a pilot test has been conducted. The system is based on an adaptive user model that integrates stereotypes and artificial neural networks. The stereotypes are based on newspaper sections and sub-sections, along with editor specified and user specified keywords. Eight subjects trained the system over six days of news papers (986 news items) and then tested the system on a seventh day (171 news items). Five users were simply asked to 'read the news' while three users developed 'corporate' profiles with explicit information needs. The evaluations suggests that such an integrated adaptive user model did, in fact, reflect the difference between the two different types of task. In both cases, the results also reflect the quality of the training of the adaptive neural network by the user in creating the user profile.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations27
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207