MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2676629495 · doi:10.29173/cais790

Automatic Routing in Triage Process

2013· article· fr· W2676629495 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dinesh Rathi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicExpert finding and Q&A systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageComputer scienceHumanitiesDomain (mathematical analysis)Process (computing)PsychologyOperating systemMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates and characterizes the impact of different features of email on effective routing of email to domain experts. The findings of the study would help in understanding how machine learning techniques such as classification could be applied effectively to develop better automatic triage process in digital reference service.Cette étude examine et caractérise l'impact de différentes caractéristiques des courriels sur leur acheminement efficace aux experts du domaine. Les résultats de l'étude permettraient de comprendre comment les techniques d'apprentissages machine comme la classification pourraient être appliquées efficacement afin de développer de meilleurs processus de triage automatique pour les services de référence numérique.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.025
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.232 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicExpert finding and Q&A systemsFrench-language works237,207