MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157365731

Thomson Legal and Regulatory at NTCIR-4: Monolingual and Pivot-Language Retrieval Experiments

2004· article· en· W2157365731 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

VenueNTCIR · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsThomson Reuters (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)Natural language processingArtificial intelligenceInformation retrievalRelevance (law)Quality (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thomson Legal and Regulatory participated in the CLIR task of the NTCIR-4 workshop. We submitted formal runs for monolingual retrieval in Japanese, Chinese and Korean. Our bilingual runs from Chinese and Korean to Japanese rely on English as a pivot lan- guage. During our monolingual experiments, we compared building stopword lists using query logs to building stopword lists from collection statistics with further manual editing. We investigated decompounding for Korean, more precisely partial credit of compound parts. Finally we incorporated pseudo-relevance feed- back in our Japanese runs. Our bilingual approach was an experiment to con- struct a system within a short timeframe using publi- cally available resources. The low quality of retrieval suggests that such an approach is not viable in a real environment.

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 score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.261 · 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