MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293959390

Identifikation von Kundenrezensionen im WWW als Basis eines Crawlers für das Opinion Mining.

2013· article· de· W2293959390 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sebastian Kastner, Thomas Mandl, Julia Maria Struß

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2013
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGynecologyArtMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diese Arbeit befasst sich mit der Klassifikation von Webseiten in solche, die Kundenrezensionen zu Produkten oder Dienstleistungen enthalten und solche, die keine enthalten. Die derart gewonnenen Rezensionen konnen anschliesend als Input fur Opinion-Mining-Systeme dienen, die sich mit der Extraktion und Klassifikation von Meinungen z. B. in der genannten Textsorte beschaftigen. Erste Evaluierungsergebnisse deuten mit einer Accuracy von 91 Prozent auf einen vielversprechenden Ansatz hin.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207