MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337339290

Building Search Engines for Algonquian languages 1

2008· article· en· W2337339290 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Odile Junker, Terry Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgonquian Papers - Archive · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resume L'elaboration de ressources linguistiques qui aident a la preservation des langues amerindiennes offrent bien des defis. Bien qu'on compile des dictionnaires, les locuteurs et locutrices sont souvent bien en peine de les utiliser. La standardisation recente de l'orthographe, la predominance de la langue orale et une grande variation dialectale font que trop souvent, les gens ne trouvent pas les mots qu'ils cherchent car ils les ecrivent de travers ou juste differemment. Nous montrons ici comment nous avons construit un moteur de recherche pour le dictionnaire cri de la Baie James sur le web (www.eastcree.org) qui permet les fautes d'orthographe ou les orthographes creatives, et comment nous l'avons ensuite incorpore dans un moteur plus complexe pour la recherche de verbes a partir de formes verbales flechies Nous montrons aussi comment nous avons adapte ces outils a une langue voisine, l'innu (ou le montagnais). Notre solution est de combiner deux approches computationnelles a la correction de l'orthographe (en mesurant la difference entre le mot entre et les mots du dictionnaire, et en appareillant la phonetique), et de les adapter aux langues algonquiennes a partir de connaissances linguistiques. Ce moteur pourrait servir de modele et etre adapte pour d' autres langues algonquiennes ou minoritaires.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.007

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlgonquian Papers - ArchiveSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207