MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806477841 · doi:10.3390/info9060133

A Machine Learning Filter for the Slot Filling Task

2018· article· en· W2806477841 on OpenAlexafffund
Kevin Lange Di Cesare, Amal Zouaq, Michel Gagnon, Ludovic Jean‐Louis

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
KeywordsComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceUSableRelationship extractionNatural language processingPrecision and recallFilter (signal processing)Information extractionMachine learningSpeech recognitionWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Slot Filling, a subtask of Relation Extraction, represents a key aspect for building structured knowledge bases usable for semantic-based information retrieval. In this work, we present a machine learning filter whose aim is to enhance the precision of relation extractors while minimizing the impact on the recall. Our approach consists in the filtering of relation extractors’ output using a binary classifier. This classifier is based on a wide array of features including syntactic, semantic and statistical features such as the most frequent part-of-speech patterns or the syntactic dependencies between entities. We experimented the classifier on the 18 participating systems in the TAC KBP 2013 English Slot Filling track. The TAC KBP English Slot Filling track is an evaluation campaign that targets the extraction of 41 pre-identified relations (e.g., title, date of birth, countries of residence, etc.) related to specific named entities (persons and organizations). Our results show that the classifier is able to improve the global precision of the best 2013 system by 20.5% and improve the F1-score for 20 relations out of 33 considered.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformationSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207