MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510461200 · doi:10.18653/v1/w16-0529

Combining Off-the-shelf Grammar and Spelling Tools for the Automatic Evaluation of Scientific Writing (AESW) Shared Task 2016

2016· article· en· W2510461200 on OpenAlexaff
René Witte, Bahar Sateli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsOntario Stroke Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpellingComputer scienceTask (project management)GrammarNatural language processingSentenceArtificial intelligenceRecallBinary numberBinary classificationLinguisticsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We applied two standard, open source tools for detecting spelling and grammar errors to the AESW 2016 shared task: After the Deadline and LanguageTool.The tools' output was combined with a Maximum Entropy machine learning model to classify each input sentence as requiring or not requiring any edits.This approach yielded the second-highest precision of 64.41% in the binary estimation task at AESW 2016, but also the lowest recall of 36.85%,resulting in an F-Measure of 46.34%.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.008

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207