MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163364265 · doi:10.3115/1614108.1614116

A fast method for parallel document identification

2007· article· en· W2163364265 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica Enright, Grzegorz Kondrak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsComputer scienceIdentification (biology)HomogeneousInformation retrievalDomain (mathematical analysis)Parallel corporaFrequency domainParallel algorithmNatural language processingData miningArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a fast method to identify homogeneous parallel documents. The method is based on collecting counts of identical low-frequency words between possibly parallel documents. The candidate with the most shared low-frequency words is selected as the parallel document. The method achieved 99.96% accuracy when tested on the EUROPARL corpus of parliamentary proceedings, failing only in anomalous cases of truncated or otherwise distorted documents. While other work has shown similar performance on this type of dataset, our approach presented here is faster and does not require training. Apart from proposing an efficient method for parallel document identification in a restricted domain, this paper furnishes evidence that parliamentary proceedings may be inappropriate for testing parallel document identification systems in general.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207