Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to Twitter's terms of service that forbid redistribution of content, creating publicly downloadable collections of tweets for research purposes has been a perpetual problem for the research community. Some collections are distributed by making available the ids of the tweets that comprise the collection and providing tools to fetch the actual content; this approach has scalability limitations. In other cases, evaluation organizers have set up APIs that provide access to collections for specific tasks, without exposing the underlying content. This is a workable solution, but difficult to sustain over the long term since someone has to maintain the APIs. We have noticed that the non-profit Internet Archive has been making available for public download captures of the so-called Twitter "spritzer" stream, which is the same source as the Tweets2013 collection used in the TREC 2013 and 2014 Microblog Tracks. We analyzed both datasets in terms of content overlap and retrieval baselines to show that the Internet Archive data can serve as a drop-in replacement for the Tweets2013 collection, thereby providing the research community with, finally, a downloadable collection of tweets. Beyond this finding, we also study the impact of tweet deletions over time and how they affect the test collections.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".