MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2468840277 · doi:10.18653/v1/s16-1151

CLaC at SemEval-2016 Task 11: Exploring linguistic and psycho-linguistic Features for Complex Word Identification

2016· preprint· en· W2468840277 on OpenAlexaff
Elnaz Davoodi, Leila Kosseim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemEvalTask (project management)Computer scienceNatural language processingIdentification (biology)Word (group theory)Context (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceRanking (information retrieval)Random forestLinguisticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the system deployed by the CLaC-EDLK team to the "SemEval 2016, Complex Word Identification task". The goal of the task is to identify if a given word in a given context is "simple" or "complex". Our system relies on linguistic features and cognitive complexity. We used several supervised models, however the Random Forest model outperformed the others. Overall our best configuration achieved a G-score of 68.8% in the task, ranking our system 21 out of 45.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.021

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.339
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing Techniques→French-language works237,207→