MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397199043

Summarizing with Roget's and with FrameNet.

2009· article· en· W2397199043 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Terry Copeck, Alistair Kennedy, Martin Scaiano, Diana Inkpen, Stan Śzpakowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and applications of categories · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrameNetComputer sciencePairwise comparisonNatural language processingSemantic similarityThesaurusInformation retrievalSentenceArtificial intelligenceGraphSimilarity (geometry)Semantic propertyTask (project management)Image (mathematics)Theoretical computer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We submitted runs from two different systems for the update summary task at TAC 2009. The first system refined its use of Roget’s Thesaurus, moving beyond 2008’s semantic relatedness to compute an entropy-based uniqueness measure, with improved results in summary construction. The other system, our first use of deeper semantic knowledge, represents sentences as FrameNet types in a conceptual graph. Pairwise similarity comparisons identify the sentences most central to the document collection content and best candidates for a summary. Our AESOP submission suggests that together, the group of TAC participants tend to select summaryworthy sentences.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and applications of categoriesSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207