MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220382889 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v27i2.18988

Interactive Information Extraction and Navigation to Enable Effective Link Analysis and Visualization of Unstructured Text

2013· article· en· W2220382889 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Budlong, C. S. F. Pine, Mark Zappavigna, James Homer, Charles Proefrock, John Gucwa, Michael Crystal, Ralph Weischedel

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsGeneral Dynamics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVisualizationKey (lock)Information extractionInformation retrievalObstacleInterface (matter)Unstructured dataInformation visualizationImperfectData miningHuman–computer interactionBig data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex


 
 
 This paper describes the Advanced Text Exploitation Assistant (ATEA), a system developed to enable intelligence analysts to perform link analysis and visualization (A&V) from information in large volumes of unstructured text. One of the key design challenges that had to be addressed was that of imperfect Information Extraction (IE) technology. While IE seems like a promising candidate for exploiting information in unstructured text, it makes mistakes. As a result, analysts do not trust its results. In this paper, we discuss how ATEA overcomes the obstacle of imperfect IE by incorporating a human-in-the-loop for review and correction of extraction results. We also discuss how coupling consolidated extraction results (corpus-level information objects) with an intuitive user interface facilitates interactive navigation of the resulting information. With these key features, ATEA enables effective link analysis and visualization of information in unstructured text.
 
 

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207