MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2365672368

An Investigation of the Eectiveness of Concept-based Approach in Medical Information Retrieval GRIUM @ CLEF2014eHealthTask 3

2014· article· en· W2365672368 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Shen, Jian‐Yun Nie, Xiaohua Liu, Xiaojie Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClefComputer scienceInformation retrievalTask (project management)Unified Medical Language SystemNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceResource (disambiguation)Domain (mathematical analysis)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our participation in the CLEF 2014 eHealth task 3a, we in- vestigate the eectiveness of concept-based retrieval techniques on med- ical IR. Concepts are determined using the existing resources and tools: UMLS Metathesaurus and MetaMap. We tested several methods based on concepts. Although some of these methods lead to slight improve- ments in retrieval eectiveness over a traditional bag-of-words method, the impact of the rich domain ressource is lower than we expected. So the whole question on whether and how such a resource can help improve medical IR eectiveness remains open. In this report, we describe the methods tested as well as their results.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207