MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887329137 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-98812-2_34

Learning Ranking Functions by Genetic Programming Revisited

2018· book-chapter· en· W2887329137 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ricardo Baeza‐Yates, Alfredo Cuzzocrea, Domenico Crea, Giovanni Lo Bianco

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSingapore Management UniversityUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaLibera Università di BolzanoZayed UniversityUniversity of the AegeanUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisUniversità degli Studi di BresciaUniversità della CalabriaUniversità di BolognaTurun YliopistoUniversité de BourgogneHögskolan i SkövdeUniversität WienMassey UniversityHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyVictoria UniversityDalian University of TechnologyUniversità degli Studi di Milano-BicoccaKangwon National UniversitySilesian University of TechnologyUniversité de FribourgSun Yat-sen UniversityUniversidad de ZaragozaNational University of SingaporeUniversity of AucklandGriffith UniversityUniversité de NantesMonash UniversityIndian Council of Agricultural ResearchTechnische Universität KaiserslauternMacquarie UniversityTechnische Universität DarmstadtAalborg UniversitetUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico IIUniversidade de CoimbraMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversität PassauGeorgia Southern UniversityUniversity of Missouri-Kansas CityNorthern Kentucky UniversityOstravská Univerzita v OstravěTallinna TehnikaülikoolVictoria University of WellingtonNanzan UniversityUniversité de MontpellierUniversity of CyprusNational Taipei University of TechnologyNational Sun Yat-sen UniversityUniversity of South AustraliaUniversity of MissouriUniversidad de MálagaČeské Vysoké Učení Technické v PrazeUniversità degli Studi di Milano
KeywordsGenetic programmingComputer scienceRanking (information retrieval)Context (archaeology)Information retrievalState (computer science)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningTheoretical computer scienceWorld Wide WebProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes in computer scienceSame topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207