MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203427563 · doi:10.1109/icdmw53433.2021.00085

Determining Standard Occupational Classification Codes from Job Descriptions in Immigration Petitions

2021· article· en· W3203427563 on OpenAlex
Sourav Mukherjee, David Widmark, Vince DiMascio, Tim Oates

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

Venue2021 International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Law
Canadian institutionsBecton Dickinson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCode (set theory)Task (project management)Variety (cybernetics)Quality (philosophy)Natural language processingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate specification of standard occupational classification (SOC) code is critical to the success of many U.S. work visa applications. Determination of correct SOC code relies on careful study of job requirements and comparison to definitions given by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is often a tedious activity. In this paper, we apply methods from natural language processing (NLP) to computationally determine SOC code based on job description. We implement and empirically evaluate a broad variety of predictive models with respect to quality of prediction and training time, and identify models best suited for this 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.315
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.121 · 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