MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576107865

WaterlooClarke: TREC 2015 LiveQA Track

2015· article· en· W2576107865 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueText REtrieval Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExpert finding and Q&A systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuestion answeringComputer scienceNISTTrack (disk drive)Task (project management)Questions and answersInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebNatural language processingArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : The goal of the LiveQA track is to automatically provide answers to questions posted by real people. Previous question answering tracks included factoid questions, list questions and complex questions[3]. Presented in 2015 for the first time the LiveQA track gave the participants an opportunity to answer questions posed by real people, as opposed to manually configured ones in the previous tasks. The questions for the task were harvested from Yahoo! Answers1 { a community question answering website. Each question was broadcasted to all registered systems. The participants had to supposed to provide an answer to every given question within a timeframe of 60 seconds. The answers were judged by human NIST assessors after the evaluation was over.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.220 · 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