MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234779292 · doi:10.1145/2847557.2847560

Machine learning meets visualization for extracting insights from text data

2016· article· en· W2234779292 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAI Matters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationBoeing
KeywordsComputer scienceVisual analyticsVisualizationProcess (computing)Data scienceAnalyticsText miningData visualizationBiomedical text miningPath (computing)Natural language processingInformation retrievalArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, text mining methods have been enriched substantially by both statistical learning and symbolic AI. Different approaches have been extensively applied over the last 30 years to extract "knowledge" from text. However, in scenarios where the path from data to decisions is unclear, or where different users may be interested in different solutions, the involvement of the user or analyst in the text mining process becomes crucial. Visual Text Analytics aims at addressing these problems by incorporating concepts from Visual Analytics to text mining and natural language processing (Keim et. al, 2010).

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.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.287 · 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