MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997394441 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i05.6292

P-SIF: Document Embeddings Using Partition Averaging

2020· article· en· W2997394441 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vivek Gupta, Ankit Saw, Pegah Nokhiz, Praneeth Netrapalli, Piyush Rai, Partha Talukdar

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Catastrophic Loss ReductionMicrosoft Research
KeywordsComputer scienceSimple (philosophy)Word (group theory)Set (abstract data type)CorrectnessRepresentation (politics)Partition (number theory)Natural language processingArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simple weighted averaging of word vectors often yields effective representations for sentences which outperform sophisticated seq2seq neural models in many tasks. While it is desirable to use the same method to represent documents as well, unfortunately, the effectiveness is lost when representing long documents involving multiple sentences. One of the key reasons is that a longer document is likely to contain words from many different topics; hence, creating a single vector while ignoring all the topical structure is unlikely to yield an effective document representation. This problem is less acute in single sentences and other short text fragments where the presence of a single topic is most likely. To alleviate this problem, we present P-SIF, a partitioned word averaging model to represent long documents. P-SIF retains the simplicity of simple weighted word averaging while taking a document's topical structure into account. In particular, P-SIF learns topic-specific vectors from a document and finally concatenates them all to represent the overall document. We provide theoretical justifications on the correctness of P-SIF. Through a comprehensive set of experiments, we demonstrate P-SIF's effectiveness compared to simple weighted averaging and many other baselines.

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 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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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