MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298208986 · doi:10.1145/3487553.3547182

Accepted Tutorials at The Web Conference 2022

2022· article· en· W4298208986 on OpenAlexaff
Riccardo Tommasini, Senjuti Basu Roy, Xuan Wang, Hongwei Wang, Heng Ji, Jiawei Han, Preslav Nakov, Giovanni Da San Martino, Firoj Alam, Markus Schedl, Elisabeth Lex, Akash Bharadwaj, Graham Cormode, Milan Dojchinovski, Jan Forberg, Johannes Frey, Pieter Bonte, Marco Balduini, Matteo Belcao, Emanuele Della Valle, Junliang Yu, Hongzhi Yin, Tong Chen, Haochen Liu, Yiqi Wang, Wenqi Fan, Xiaorui Liu, Jamell Dacon, Lingjuan Lye, Jiliang Tang, Aristides Gionis, Stefan Neumann, Bruno Ordozgoiti, Simon Razniewski, Hiba Arnaout, Shrestha Ghosh, Fabian M. Suchanek, Lingfei Wu, Yu Chen, Yunyao Li, Bang Liu, Filip Ilievski, Daniel Garijo, Hans Chalupsky, Pedro Szekely, Ilias Kanellos, Dimitris Sacharidis, Thanasis Vergoulis, Nurendra Choudhary, Nikhil Rao, Karthik Subbian, Srinivasan H. Sengamedu, Chandan K. Reddy, Friedhelm Victor, Bernhard Haslhofer, George Katsogiannis- Meimarakis, Georgia Koutrika, Shengmin Jin, Danai Koutra, Reza Zafarani, Yulia Tsvetkov, Vidhisha Balachandran, Sachin Kumar, Xiangyu Zhao, Bo Chen, Huifeng Guo, Yejing Wang, Ruiming Tang, Yang Zhang, Wenjie Wang, Peng Wu, Fuli Feng, Xiangnan He

Bibliographic record

VenueCompanion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMultimediaStyle (visual arts)ArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes the content of the 20 tutorials that have been given at The Web Conference 2022: 85% of these tutorials are lecture style, and 15% of these are hands on.

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)0.006
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2420.162

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 head0.271
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCompanion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2022Same topicEducational Technology and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207