CUNY-UIUC-SRI TAC-KBP2011 Entity Linking System Description
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we describe a joint effort by the City University of New York (CUNY), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) and SRI International at participating in the mono-lingual entity linking (MLEL) and cross-lingual entity linking (CLEL) tasks for the NIST Text Analysis Conference (TAC) Knowledge Base Population (KBP2011) track. The MLEL system is based on a simple combination of two published systems by CUNY (Chen and Ji, 2011) and UIUC (Ratinov et al., 2011). Therefore, we mainly focus on describing our new CLEL system. In addition to a baseline system based on name translation, machine translation and MLEL, we propose two novel approaches. One is based on a cross-lingual name similarity matrix, iteratively updated based on monolingual co-occurrence, and the other uses topic modeling to enhance performance. Our best systems placed 4th in mono-lingual track and 2nd in cross-lingual track.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.051 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".