MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From Citizens to Decision-Makers

2019· book-chapter· en· W4246094123 on OpenAlexaff
Eya Boukchina, Sehl Mellouli, Emna Menif

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Language Processing · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaOrder (exchange)DemocracyComputer scienceProcess (computing)Data sciencePublic relationsPolitical scienceInternet privacyWorld Wide WebBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citizens' participation is a form of democracy in which citizens are part of the decision-making process with regard to the development of their society. In today's emergence of Information and Communication Technologies, citizens can participate in these processes by submitting inputs through digital media such as social media platforms or dedicated websites. From these different means, a high quantity of data, of different forms (text, image, video), can be generated. This data needs to be processed in order to extract valuable data that can be used by a city's decision-makers. This paper presents natural language processing techniques to extract valuable information from comments posted by citizens. It applies the Latent Semantic Analysis on a corpus of citizens' comments to automatically identify the subjects that were raised by citizens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural Language ProcessingSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207