MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285793742 · doi:10.1007/s10579-022-09602-7

Speech acts in the Dutch COVID-19 Press Conferences

2022· article· en· W4285793742 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daan Schueler, M. Marx

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Resources and Evaluation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekCanadian Institute of Steel Construction
KeywordsSpeech actComputer scienceMetadataLinguisticsReciprocalCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Direct speechNatural language processingMean reciprocal rankArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)TransformerBritish National CorpusWorld Wide WebMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An open source corpus of all Dutch COVID-19 Press Conferences with sentences annotated on the basis of John Searle's Speech Act taxonomy was created. It contains all 58 press conferences held between March 6 2020 and April 20 2021 and has 9.441 manually annotated sentences. Speech acts were annotated in a consistent manner, with a Krippendorff's alpha of .71. The corpus is easy to use and rich in metadata, with lexical, syntactic, discourse (speaker, question or answer) features and information on the type of regulations being present. We analyse the press conferences in terms of speech act usage, giving insight into the use of speech acts over time, the relation of speech act usage to real world phenomena, the general structure of the press conferences and the division of roles between speakers. Relations were found between speech act usage and the type of press conference (i.e. easing, tightening or neutral) as well as the number of hospital admissions. Speech act classes showed preferred locations within the press conferences, indicating a general structure. Distinct roles between speakers were identified. We also investigate the use of our set of labelled sentences for training a speech act classifier and achieve a reasonable accuracy of .73 and a mean reciprocal rank of .74 with the state of the art transformer RoBERTa model. Supplementary Information: The online version of this article contains supplementary material available 10.1007/s10579-022-09602-7.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage Resources and EvaluationSame topicText Readability and SimplificationFrench-language works237,207