MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PROBABILISTIC MODELS FOR FOCUSED WEB CRAWLING

2012· article· en· W2135390635 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

VenueComputational Intelligence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConditional random fieldWeb crawlerCrawlingHidden Markov modelProbabilistic logicGraphical modelMaximum-entropy Markov modelArtificial intelligenceWeb pageMarkov chainStatistical modelData miningInformation retrievalMachine learningMarkov modelWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A focused crawler is an efficient tool used to traverse the Web to gather documents on a specific topic. It can be used to build domain‐specific Web search portals and online personalized search tools. Focused crawlers can only use information obtained from previously crawled pages to estimate the relevance of a newly seen URL. Therefore, good performance depends on powerful modeling of context as well as the quality of the current observations. To address this challenge, we propose capturing sequential patterns along paths leading to targets based on probabilistic models. We model the process of crawling by a walk along an underlying chain of hidden states, defined by hop distance from target pages, from which the actual topics of the documents are observed. When a new document is seen, prediction amounts to estimating the distance of this document from a target. Within this framework, we propose two probabilistic models for focused crawling, Maximum Entropy Markov Model (MEMM) and Linear‐chain Conditional Random Field (CRF). With MEMM, we exploit multiple overlapping features, such as anchor text, to represent useful context and form a chain of local classifier models. With CRF, a form of undirected graphical models, we focus on obtaining global optimal solutions along the sequences by taking advantage not only of text content, but also of linkage relations. We conclude with an experimental validation and comparison with focused crawling based on Best‐First Search (BFS), Hidden Markov Model (HMM), and Context‐graph Search (CGS).

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.223 · 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