MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3060766412 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2008.08612

A Survey on Text Simplification

2020· preprint· en· W3060766412 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceField (mathematics)Natural language processingFocus (optics)Artificial intelligenceText simplificationSimilarity (geometry)Semantic similarityInformation retrievalData scienceSentence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Text Simplification (TS) aims to reduce the linguistic complexity of content to make it easier to understand. Research in TS has been of keen interest, especially as approaches to TS have shifted from manual, hand-crafted rules to automated simplification. This survey seeks to provide a comprehensive overview of TS, including a brief description of earlier approaches used, discussion of various aspects of simplification (lexical, semantic and syntactic), and latest techniques being utilized in the field. We note that the research in the field has clearly shifted towards utilizing deep learning techniques to perform TS, with a specific focus on developing solutions to combat the lack of data available for simplification. We also include a discussion of datasets and evaluations metrics commonly used, along with discussion of related fields within Natural Language Processing (NLP), like semantic similarity.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.050 · 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