MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2250240387

How Joe and Jane Tweet about Their Health: Mining for Personal Health Information on Twitter

2013· article· en· W2250240387 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueRecent Advances in Natural Language Processing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWordNetComputer scienceSocial mediaWorld Wide WebOntologyThe InternetPersonally identifiable informationInformation retrievalInternet privacyInformation extractionHealth informationData scienceHealth careComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With 19%‐28% of Internet users participating in online health discussions, it became imperative to be able to detect and analyze posted personal health information (PHI). In this work we introduce two semantic-based methods for mining PHI on social networks which will warn the users about potential privacy breaches. One method uses WordNet as a source of health-related knowledge, another - an ontology of personal relations. We use Twitter data to empirically evaluate our methods. We also apply Machine Learning to demonstrate advantages of our extraction procedure when tweets containing PHI have to be automatically identified among other tweets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.338 · 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