MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128027916

University of Waterloo at TREC 2008 Blog track

2008· article· en· W2128027916 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

VenueText REtrieval Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLexiconDivergence (linguistics)Information retrievalNatural language processingMatching (statistics)Track (disk drive)Artificial intelligencePolarity (international relations)LinguisticsStatisticsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper reports the University of Waterloo participation in the opinion and polarity tasks of the Blog track. The proposed method uses a lexicon built from several linguistic resources. The opinion discriminating ability of each subjective lexical unit was estimated using the Kullback-Leibler divergence. The KLD scores of subjective words occurring within fixed-size windows around instances of query terms were used in calculating document scores. The described system also used a method of identifying phrases in topic titles by matching them to Wikipedia titles. The results show that both KLD-based scores of subjective lexical units and Wikipedia-matched phrases are useful techniques that help improve opinion retrieval performance.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.206 · 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