MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2471942461 · doi:10.29173/cais429

The Usefulness of Standardized Definitions in Thesauri: An Assessment Through Interindexer Consistency Measurements

2013· article· en· W2471942461 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michèle Hudon

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsistency (knowledge bases)Search engine indexingInformation retrievalThesaurusComputer scienceNatural language processingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was conducted to determine whether the availability of standardized definitions in a thesaurus of descriptors used as indexing aid could raise levels of terminological consistency among novice non specialist indexers. this paper recalls the project's objectives, briefly describes the methodology, and discusses some of the most interesting findings.

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)0.143
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.467
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1430.467
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0150.014
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI→Same topicLexicography and Language Studies→French-language works237,207→