MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151849342 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2003.1174243

Support vector machines for text categorization

2003· article· en· W2151849342 on OpenAlexaff
Avik Basu, Clarence P. Walters, Michael Shepherd

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText and Document Classification Technologies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCategorizationText categorizationSortingSet (abstract data type)Support vector machineArtificial intelligenceVocabularyFeature (linguistics)Natural language processingInformation retrievalProcess (computing)Feature vector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Text categorization is the process of sorting text documents into one or more predefined categories or classes of similar documents. Differences in the results of such categorization arise from the feature set chosen to base the association of a given document with a given category. Advocates of text categorization recognize that the sorting of text documents into categories of like documents reduces the overhead required for fast retrieval of such documents and provides smaller domains in which the users may explore similar documents. In this paper we are interested in examining whether automatic classification of news texts can be improved by prefiltering the vocabulary to reduce the feature set used in the computations. First we compare artificial neural network and support vector machine algorithms for use as text classifiers of news items. Secondly, we identify a reduction in feature set that provides improved results.

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)0.013
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.011

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations146
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicText and Document Classification TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207