MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2696068122 · doi:10.18653/v1/w17-2407

Extract with Order for Coherent Multi-Document Summarization

2017· article· en· W2696068122 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsAutomatic summarizationReadabilityComputer scienceCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Rank (graph theory)Natural language processingKey (lock)Artificial intelligenceInformation retrievalSelection (genetic algorithm)SentenceMulti-document summarizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we aim at developing an extractive summarizer in the multi-document setting. We implement a rank based sentence selection using continuous vector representations along with key-phrases. Furthermore, we propose a model to tackle summary coherence for increasing readability. We conduct experiments on the Document Understanding Conference (DUC) 2004 datasets using ROUGE toolkit. Our experiments demonstrate that the methods bring significant improvements over the state of the art methods in terms of informativity and coherence.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207