MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127990768 · doi:10.1109/imcsit.2008.4747222

Sense-based clustering of Polish nouns in the extraction of semantic relatedness

2008· article· en· W2127990768 on OpenAlexaff
Bartosz Broda, Maciej Piasecki, Stanisław Szpakowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Multiconference on Computer Science and Information Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWordNetComputer scienceNounCluster analysisNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceResource (disambiguation)Semantic similarityLexical databaseSoftwareInformation retrievalProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction of a wordnet from scratch requires intelligent software support. An accurate measure of semantic relatedness can be used to extract groups of semantically close words from a corpus. Such groups help a lexicographer make decisions about synset membership and synset placement in the network. We have adapted to Polish the well-known algorithm of Clustering by Committee, and tested it on the largest Polish corpus available. The evaluation by way of a plWordNet-based synonymy test used Polish WordNet, a resource still under development. The results are consistent with a few benchmarks, but not encouraging enough yet to make a wordnet writer's support tool immediately useful.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Multiconference on Computer Science and Information TechnologySame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207