MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780329366 · doi:10.1142/s1793351x17400207

On the Influence of Contextual Features for the Identification of Complex Words

2017· article· en· W2780329366 on OpenAlexafffund
Elnaz Davoodi, Leila Kosseim, Matthew Mongrain

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Semantic Computing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersMedical Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSemEvalWord (group theory)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingIdentification (biology)Context (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Natural languageWord identificationWord recognitionLinguisticsTask (project management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper evaluates the effect of the context of a target word on the identification of complex words in natural language texts. The approach automatically tags words as either complex or not, based on two sets of features: base features that only pertain to the target word, and contextual features that take the context of the target word into account. We experimented with several supervised machine learning models, and trained and tested the approach with the 2016 SemEval Word Complexity Data Set. Results show that when discriminating base features are used, the words around the target word can supplement those features and improve the recognition of complex words.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Semantic ComputingSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207