Elaboration of a new framework for fine-grained epidemiological annotation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Event-based surveillance (EBS) gathers information from a variety of data sources, including online news articles. Unlike the data from formal reporting, the EBS data are not structured, and their interpretation can overwhelm epidemic intelligence (EI) capacities in terms of available human resources. Therefore, diverse EBS systems that automatically process (all or part of) the acquired nonstructured data from online news articles have been developed. These EBS systems (e.g., GPHIN, HealthMap, MedISys, ProMED, PADI-web) can use annotated data to improve the surveillance systems. This paper describes a framework for the annotation of epidemiological information in animal disease-related news articles. We provide annotation guidelines that are generic and applicable to both animal and zoonotic infectious diseases, regardless of the pathogen involved or its mode of transmission (e.g., vector-borne, airborne, by contact). The framework relies on the successive annotation of all the sentences from a news article. The annotator evaluates the sentences in a specific epidemiological context, corresponding to the publication date of the news article.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".