Using Convolutional Neural Networks to Extract Keywords and Keyphrases: A Case Study for Foodborne Illnesses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Keywords and keyphrases are important for Natural Language Processing (NLP) applications such as document classification, information retrieval, and topic identification. They are also useful for capturing different classes of entities from content related to healthcare, biology, food science, and journalism fields. There are different approaches to extract keywords and keyphrases. Deep learning approaches have achieved high-performance results in terms of keywords and keyphrase extraction. However, among deep learning approaches, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) potentials have not been fully explored as a technique for extracting keywords and keyphrases. In this work, we performed a comparative study using a benchmark dataset, the IEEE Xplore collection to test the CNN generalization ability in selecting keywords and keyphrases. In addition, we further collected a corpus in the field of foodborne illness outbreaks. We utilize this corpus to develop a CNN-based identification approach of keywords and keyphrases related to foodborne illnesses. Results were compared with several supervised (KEA, GuidedLDA) and unsupervised (LDA) machine learning algorithms. CNN outperformed these algorithms in selecting relevant keywords and keyphrases for foodborne illnesses. The findings of this study have also confirmed superiority of CNN-based algorithm for keyphrase extraction to other machine learning approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it