MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Topic Segmentation : A First Stage to Dialog-Based Information Extraction.

2001· article· en· W21176108 on OpenAlexaff
Narjès Boufaden, Guy Lapalme, Yoshua Bengio

Bibliographic record

VenueNLPRS · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceDialog boxInformation extractionArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingHidden Markov modelSpeech recognitionWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of topic seg-mentation of manually transcribed speech in order to facilitate informa-tion extraction from dialogs. Our approach is based on a combina-tion of multi-source knowledge mod-eled by hidden Markov models. We experiment with different combina-tions of linguistic-level cues on di-alogs dealing with search and rescue missions. Results show the effective-ness of multi-source knowledge.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0110.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.012

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNLPRSSame topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207