MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603660651

Ad-hoc Holistic Ranking Aggregation

2012· dissertation· en· W2603660651 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mina Saleeb

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)Post hocInformation retrievalComputer scienceMedicineDentistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data exploration is considered one of the major processes that enables the user to analyze massive amount of data in order to find the most important and relevant informa- tion needed. Aggregation and Ranking are two of the most frequently used tools in data exploration. The interaction between ranking and aggregation has been studied widely from different perspectives. In this thesis, a comprehensive survey about this interaction is studied. Holistic Ranking Aggregation which is a new interaction is introduced. Finally, various algorithms are proposed to efficiently process ad-hoc holistic ranking aggregation for both monotone and generic scoring functions.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207