MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185810805

University of Ottawa's Contribution to CLEF 2005, the CL-SR Track

2005· article· en· W2185810805 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diana Inkpen, Muath Alzghool, Aminul Islam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClefComputer scienceInformation retrievalSearch engine indexingNatural language processingWeightingDocument retrievalTask (project management)Artificial intelligenceScheme (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the participation of the University of Ottawa in the Cross-Language Spoken Document Retrieval task at CLEF 2005. In order to translate the queries, we combined the results of several online Machine Translation tools. For the Information Retrieval component we used the SMART system, with several weighting schemes for indexing the documents and the queries. One scheme in particular lead to better results than other combinations. We present the results of the submitted runs and of many unofficial runs. We compare the effect of several translations from each language. We present results on phonetic transcripts of the collection and queries and on the combination of text and phonetic transcripts.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.050

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207