Author Verification Using Common N-Gram Profiles of Text Documents
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Authorship verification is the problem of answering the question whether or not a sample text document was written by a specific person, given a few other documents known to be authored by them. We propose a proximity based method for one-class classification that applies the Common N-Gram (CNG) dissimilarity measure. The CNG dissimilarity (Kešelj et al., 2003) is based on the differences in the frequencies of n-grams of tokens (characters, words) that are most common in the considered documents. Our method utilizes the pairs of most dissimilar documents among documents of known authorship. We evaluate various variants of the method in the setting of a single classifier or an ensemble of classifiers, on a multilingual authorship verification corpus of the PAN 2013 Author Identification evaluation framework. Our method yields competitive results when compared to the results achieved by the participants of the PAN 2013 competition on the entire set, as well as separately on two subsets — English and Spanish ones — out of the three language subsets of the corpus. 1
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it