MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W413120383

Frequent Itemset Mining for Query Expansion in Microblog Ad-hoc Search

2012· article· en· W413120383 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

VenueText REtrieval Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobloggingComputer scienceSocial mediaData miningInformation retrievalProcess (computing)Volume (thermodynamics)World Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : The high volume of Tweets arriving every second and the requirement to index them in real time emphasize the importance of the computational complexity of algorithms used to process them. In this paper, we investigate the use of Frequent Itemsets Mining to quickly discover patterns that can later be used for query expansion. Frequent Itemsets Mining (FIM) has been highly adopted to mine data streams because of its computational simplicity and the possibility to parallelize some of its steps. Initial experiments using the TREC 2011 Microblogs track queries showed that it is possible to improve the performance of BM25, however this was not the case with the 2012 queries. Our analysis of the difference in performance provides insight about how to make best use of FIM for microblog search.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.247 · 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