Perspective-based search: a new paradigm for bursting the information bubble
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, individuals heavily rely on search engines for seeking information. The presence of information bubbles (filter bubbles and echo chambers) can threaten the effectiveness of these systems in providing unbiased information and damage healthy civic discourse and open-minded deliberation. In this paper, we propose a new paradigm for search that aims at mitigating the information bubble in the search. The paradigm, which we call perspective-based search (PBS), is based on the intuition that in a fair search the user should not be limited to the results corresponding to a specific perspective of the search topic. Briefly, in PBS, different perspectives of the search topic are identified and presented to the user and the user can select a perspective for the search results. In this paper, we focus on the paradigm itself, why it is an appropriate solution, and how it differs from other solutions. We raise new questions and call for research on the paradigm and on providing solutions for implementing its required components. We do not aim at providing any specific implementation for it, although we provide some hints on implementing it. We also provide a survey of the related concepts and methods and discuss their differences with PBS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".