MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129909699 · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00085

Learning Entailment Relations by Global Graph Structure Optimization

2011· article· en· W2129909699 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jonathan Berant, Ido Dagan, Jacob Goldberger

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Linguistics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of HaifaAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science Foundation
KeywordsLogical consequenceComputer scienceTextual entailmentInferenceGraphTransitive relationArtificial intelligenceConstraint (computer-aided design)Theoretical computer scienceNatural language processingMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying entailment relations between predicates is an important part of applied semantic inference. In this article we propose a global inference algorithm that learns such entailment rules. First, we define a graph structure over predicates that represents entailment relations as directed edges. Then, we use a global transitivity constraint on the graph to learn the optimal set of edges, formulating the optimization problem as an Integer Linear Program. The algorithm is applied in a setting where, given a target concept, the algorithm learns on the fly all entailment rules between predicates that co-occur with this concept. Results show that our global algorithm improves performance over baseline algorithms by more than 10%.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
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

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

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational LinguisticsSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207