MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408506617

Relational Recognition for Information Extraction in Free Text Documents.

2005· article· en· W2408506617 on OpenAlexaff
Erik R. Larson, Todd Hughes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTupleComputer scienceRelationship extractionInformation extractionInformation retrievalBridge (graph theory)Domain (mathematical analysis)Extraction (chemistry)Relation (database)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingData miningMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information extraction tools provide an important means for distilling content from free text documents, and knowledge-based tools provide an important means for automatically reasoning over statements expressed as well-formed tuples. A number of techniques deliver reliable extraction of entities, less reliable extraction of relations, and poor extraction on entity-entity-relation tuples. However, tuple extraction is needed to bridge the gap between free text and knowledge-based applications. We describe an information extraction system and experiment that demonstrates accurate tuple extraction in a selected domain.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.020

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207