MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287887229 · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.socialnlp-1

Proceedings of the Tenth International Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Social Media

2022· paratext· en· W4287887229 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsComputer scienceSocial mediaNatural (archaeology)Natural language processingWorld Wide WebHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you to the Tenth Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Social Media-SocialNLP 2022, associated with NAACL 2022. SocialNLP is an inter-disciplinary area of natural language processing (NLP) and social computing. We hold SocialNLP twice a year: one in the NLP venue, the other in the associated venue such as those for web technology or artificial intelligence. This year the other version has been successfully held in conjunction with TheWebConf 2022 (formerly WWW), and we are very happily looking forward to the NLP version in NAACL 2022. We are very glad that the number of submissions to this year's workshop keeps increasing, and the submissions themselves were still of high quality with the accepted threshold of 3.33 (maximum 5), which again leads to a competitive selection process. We received submissions from Asia, Europe, and the United States. Considering the review process is rigorous and we want to encourage authors to participate in the workshop, we accepted 8 oral papers. These exciting papers include novel and practical topics for researchers working on NLP for social media, such as bias mitigation, domain transfer, and dataset constructed for the newly emerged research problems. We believe they will benefit our research community.

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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.302
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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207