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
Online conversations, such as blogs, provide rich amount of information and opinions about popular queries. Given a query, traditional blog sites return a set of conversations often consisting of thousands of comments with complex thread structure. Since the interfaces of these blog sites do not provide any overview of the data, it becomes very difficult for the user to explore and analyze such a large amount of conversational data. In this paper, we present MultiConVis, a visual text analytics system designed to support the exploration of a collection of online conversations. Our system tightly integrates NLP techniques for topic modeling and sentiment analysis with information visualizations, by considering the unique characteristics of online conversations. The resulting interface supports the user exploration, starting from a possibly large set of conversations, then narrowing down to the subset of conversations, and eventually drilling-down to the set of comments of one conversation. Our evaluations through case studies with domain experts and a formal user study with regular blog readers illustrate the potential benefits of our approach, when compared to a traditional blog reading interface.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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