MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185922622 · doi:10.1145/3462757.3466102

Using transformers to improve answer retrieval for legal questions

2021· article· en· W3185922622 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsThomson Reuters (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAutomatic summarizationQuestion answeringTransformerSupport vector machineArtificial intelligenceMachine translationMachine learningMean reciprocal rankNatural language processingInformation retrievalEngineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transformer architectures such as BERT, XLNet, and others are frequently used in the field of natural language processing. Transformers have achieved state-of-the-art performance in tasks such as text classification, passage summarization, machine translation, and question answering. Efficient hosting of transformer models, however, is a difficult task because of their large size and high latency. In this work, we describe how we deploy a RoBERTa Base question answer classification model in a production environment. We also compare the answer retrieval performance of a RoBERTa Base classifier against a traditional machine learning model in the legal domain by measuring the performance difference between a trained linear SVM on the publicly available PRIVACYQA dataset. We show that RoBERTa achieves a 31% improvement in F1-score and a 41% improvement in Mean Reciprocal Rank over the traditional SVM.

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 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 score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207