Progressive Multi-task Learning with Controlled Information Flow for Joint Entity and Relation Extraction
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
Multitask learning has shown promising performance in learning multiple related tasks simultaneously, and variants of model architectures have been proposed, especially for supervised classification problems. One goal of multitask learning is to extract a good representation that sufficiently captures the relevant part of the input about the output for each learning task. To achieve this objective, in this paper we design a multitask learning architecture based on the observation that correlations exist between outputs of some related tasks (e.g. entity recognition and relation extraction tasks), and they reflect the relevant features that need to be extracted from the input. As outputs are unobserved, our proposed model exploits task predictions in lower layers of the neural model, also referred to as early predictions in this work. But we control the injection of early predictions to ensure that we extract good task-specific representations for classification. We refer to this model as a Progressive Multitask learning model with Explicit Interactions (PMEI). Extensive experiments on multiple benchmark datasets produce state-of-the-art results on the joint entity and relation extraction task.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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