Mining hidden constrained streams in practice: Informed search in dynamic filter spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we tackle the recently proposed problem of hidden streams. In many situations, the data stream that we are interested in, is not directly accessible. Instead, part of the data can be accessed only through applying filters (e.g. keyword filtering). In fact this is the case of the most discussed social stream today, Twitter. The problem in this case is how to retrieve as many relevant documents as possible by applying the most appropriate set of filters to the original stream and, at the same time, respect a number of constrains (e.g. maximum number of filters that can be applied). In this work we introduce a search approach on a dynamic filter space. We utilize heterogeneous filters (not only keywords) making no assumptions about the attributes of the individual filters. We advance current research by considering realistically hard constraints based on real-world scenarios that require tracking of multiple dynamic topics. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approaches on a set of topics of static and dynamic nature. The development of the approach was motivated by a real application. Our system is deployed in Dublin City's Traffic Management Center and allows the city officers to analyze large sources of heterogeneous data and identify events related to traffic as well as emergencies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".