MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of template removal on Web search DOI 10.5752/P.2316-9451.2012v1n1p28

2012· article· en· W2111543529 on OpenAlexaff
Kaio Wagner, Edleno Silva de Moura, David Fernandes, Marco Cristo, Altigran Soares da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueAbakós · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTemplateInformation retrievalScale (ratio)Web pageQuality (philosophy)Search engineWorld Wide WebData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous work in literature has indicated that template of web pages represent noisy information in web collections, and advocate that the simple removal of template result in improvements in quality of results provided by Web search systems. In this paper, we study the impact of template removal in two distinct scenarios: large scale web search collections, which consist of several distinct websites, and intrasite web collections, involving searches inside of web sites. Our work is the first in literature to study the impact of template removal to search systems in large scale Web collections. The study was carried out using an automatic template detection method previously proposed by us. As contributions, we present statistics about the application of this automatic template detection method to the well known GOV2 reference collection, a large scale Web collection. We also present experiments comparing the amount of template detected by our automatic method to the ones obtained when humans select templates. And finally, experiments which indicate that, in both experimented scenarios, template removal does not improve the quality of results provided by search systems, but can play the role of an effective loss compression method by reducing the size of their indexes.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbakósSame topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207