Multiclass patent document classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Text classification is used in information extraction and retrieval from a given text, and text classification has been considered as an important step to manage a vast number of records given in digital form that is far-reaching and expanding. This article addresses patent document classification problem into fifteen different categories or classes, where some classes overlap with each other for practical reasons. For the development of the classification model using machine learning techniques, useful features have been extracted from the given documents. The features are used to classify patent document as well as to generate useful tag-words. The overall objective of this work is to systematize NASA’s patent management, by developing a set of automated tools that can assist NASA to manage and market its portfolio of intellectual properties (IP), and to enable easier discovery of relevant IP by users. We have identified an array of methods that can be applied such as k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN), two variations of the Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithms, and two tree based classification algorithms: Random Forest and J48. The major research steps in this paper consist of filtering techniques for variable selection, information gain and feature correlation analysis, and training and testing potential models using effective classifiers. Further, the obstacles associated with the imbalanced data were mitigated by adding pseudo-synthetic data wherever appropriate, which resulted in a superior SVM classifier based model.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
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".