MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904760604 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33016188

Enriching Word Embeddings with a Regressor Instead of Labeled Corpora

2019· article· en· W2904760604 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Abdalla, Magnus Sahlgren, Graeme Hirst

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsComputer scienceNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceWord (group theory)LexiconTask (project management)EmbeddingSentenceSemEvalWord embeddingAnalogyBinary classificationLinguisticsSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel method for enriching word-embeddings without the need of a labeled corpus. Instead, we show that relying on a regressor – trained with a small lexicon to predict pseudo-labels – significantly improves performance over current techniques that rely on human-derived sentence-level labels for an entire corpora. Our approach enables enrichment for corpora that have no labels (such as Wikipedia). Exploring the utility of this general approach in both sentiment and non-sentiment-focused tasks, we show how enriching embeddings, for both Twitter and Wikipedia-based embeddings, provide notable improvements in performance for: binary sentiment classification, SemEval Tasks, embedding analogy task, and, document classification. Importantly, our approach is notably better and more generalizable than other state-of-the-art approaches for enriching both labeled and unlabeled corpora.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207