MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285280865 · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.lchange-1.19

UAlberta at LSCDiscovery: Lexical Semantic Change Detection via Word Sense Disambiguation

2022· article· en· W4285280865 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniela Teodorescu, Spencer von der Ohe, Grzegorz Kondrak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Machine Intelligence Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantic changeTask (project management)Natural language processingWord (group theory)Word-sense disambiguationArtificial intelligenceSemantics (computer science)Security tokenSemEvalFrame (networking)LinguisticsWordNetProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe our two systems for the shared task on Lexical Semantic Change Discovery in Spanish.For binary change detection, we frame the task as a word sense disambiguation (WSD) problem.We derive sense frequency distributions for target words in both old and modern corpora.We assume that the word semantics have changed if a sense is observed in only one of the two corpora, or the relative change for any sense exceeds a tuned threshold.For graded change discovery, we follow the design of CIRCE (Pömsl and Lyapin, 2020) by combining both static and contextual embeddings.For contextual embeddings, we use XLM-RoBERTa instead of BERT, and train the model to predict a masked token instead of the time period.Our language-independent methods achieve results that are close to the bestperforming systems in the shared 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.027

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207