MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182794451

CUNY-BLENDER TAC-KBP2012 Entity Linking System and Slot Filling Validation System

2012· article· en· W2182794451 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suzanne Tamang, Zheng Chen, Heng Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and applications of categories · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)Rank (graph theory)Cluster analysisData miningWork (physics)Information retrievalArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsSystems engineeringEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This year the CUNY-BLENDER team participated in the English Entity Linking and Slot Filling Validation tracks. for entity linking, we apply two new techniques, collaborative clustering and query reformulation. For answer validation, we use a logistic regression model trained on within-system and crosssystem features to re-rank the merged answer sets generated by individual systems. In this paper, we describe our approaches to each task in more detail, assess the impact of out techniques, and presents new directions for future work.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.026

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and applications of categoriesSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207