MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887005207 · doi:10.18653/v1/w18-3012

Unsupervised Random Walk Sentence Embeddings: A Strong but Simple Baseline

2018· article· en· W2887005207 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
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRandom walkSentenceHyperparameterWord (group theory)Computer scienceSimple (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceSimilarity (geometry)Baseline (sea)Natural language processingMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a random walk model of text generation, This simple method even outperforms far more complex approaches such as LSTMs on textual similarity tasks. In this paper, we first show that word vector length has a confounding effect on the probability of a sentence being generated in Arora et al.'s model. We propose a random walk model that is robust to this confound, where the probability of word generation is inversely related to the angular distance between the word and sentence embeddings. Our approach beats Arora et al.'s by up to 44.4% on textual similarity tasks and is competitive with state-of-the-art methods. Unlike Arora et al.'s method, ours requires no hyperparameter tuning, which means it can be used when there is no labelled data.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations95
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207