MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126034021 · doi:10.1017/s1351324901002765

Discovery of inference rules for question-answering

2001· article· en· W2126034021 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

VenueNatural Language Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuestion answeringInferenceComputer scienceDependency (UML)Set (abstract data type)ParsingArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingRule of inferenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the main challenges in question-answering is the potential mismatch between the expressions in questions and the expressions in texts. While humans appear to use inference rules such as ‘X writes Y’ implies ‘X is the author of Y’ in answering questions, such rules are generally unavailable to question-answering systems due to the inherent difficulty in constructing them. In this paper, we present an unsupervised algorithm for discovering inference rules from text. Our algorithm is based on an extended version of Harris’ Distributional Hypothesis, which states that words that occurred in the same contexts tend to be similar. Instead of using this hypothesis on words, we apply it to paths in the dependency trees of a parsed corpus. Essentially, if two paths tend to link the same set of words, we hypothesize that their meanings are similar. We use examples to show that our system discovers many inference rules easily missed by humans.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.245 · 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