MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intra-Correlation Encoding for Chinese Sentence Intention Matching

2020· article· en· W3118205297 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Zhang, Yifeng Li, Wenpeng Lü, Ping Jian, Guoqiang Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of NiagaraBrock University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSentenceNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceEncoding (memory)AmbiguityWord (group theory)Matching (statistics)EmbeddingGranularityFeature (linguistics)LinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sentence intention matching is vital for natural language understanding.Especially for Chinese sentence intention matching task, due to the ambiguity of Chinese words, semantic missing or semantic confusion are more likely to occur in the encoding process.Although the existing methods have enriched text representation through pre-trained word embedding to solve this problem, due to the particularity of Chinese text, different granularities of pre-trained word embedding will affect the semantic description of a piece of text.In this paper, we propose an effective approach that combines charactergranularity and word-granularity features to perform sentence intention matching, and we utilize soft alignment attention to enhance the local information of sentences on the corresponding levels.The proposed method can capture sentence feature information from multiple perspectives and correlation information between different levels of sentences.By evaluating on BQ and LCQMC datasets, our model has achieved remarkable results, and demonstrates better or comparable performance with BERT-based models.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207