MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209399758 · doi:10.1136/oem-2021-epi.442

S-464 Automated Occupational Encoding to the Canadian National Occupation Classification using an Ensemble Classifier from TF-IDF and Doc2Vec Embeddings

2021· article· en· W3209399758 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cesar Garcia, Anil Adisesh, Christopher J. O. Baker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCoding (social sciences)Classifier (UML)Support vector machineData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Occupational encoding is a technique that allows job titles provided by study participants to be categorized according to their role in the labor force. Encoding has primarily been a slow error-prone manual process which is ripe for automation. <h3>Objectives</h3> Our goals was to design and test an automated coding prototype using machine learning techniques. <h3>Methods</h3> The prototype classification system ENENOC (the ENsemble Encoder for the National Occupational Classification) is comprised of series of steps involving data cleaning, exact match search, multi classifier ensembling, hierarchical classification, and multiple output selection. In the absence of exact matching between job title input and NOC category descriptions, the input data is embedded using the TF-IDF algorithm and Doc2Vec. The embeddings are fed into a hierarchical, ensemble classifier that uses classical machine learning techniques: Random Forests, Support Vector Machine and K-Nearest Neighbour. Ensemble encoding is achieved using a majority-voting system. The hierarchical two tier classification methodology first predicts the first digit of the NOC code followed while the second tier predicts the second third and fourth digit of the NOC code for the input data. The combined approach produces a single, 4-digit code as a top choice, as well as four alternate NOC codes, that serve as additional ranked choice based on the Doc2Vec model. <h3>Results</h3> The prototype was benchmarked on a manually annotated data set comprising of 64,000 records. It produced a top-1 Per-Digit Macro F1-Score of 0.65 and a top-5 Per-Digit Macro F1-Score of 0.76, both of which are highly within published accuracy ranges for manual coding (44% to 89% inter-annotator agreement). ENENOC coded 30,000 job titles in 3 hours. <h3>Conclusion</h3> The ENENOC prototype is a sophisticated ENsemble Encoder for the National Occupational Classification which has state of the art performance accuracy with significant speed improvements over manual coding.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.347
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207