MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312691443 · doi:10.14778/3554821.3554869

SmartBench

2022· article· en· W4312691443 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelghny Orogat, Ahmed El-Roby

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceQuestion answeringUsabilityCover (algebra)Task (project management)Software deploymentNatural languageInformation retrievalQuality (philosophy)Natural language processingArtificial intelligenceSoftware engineeringHuman–computer interactionSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, a significant number of question answering (QA) systems that retrieve answers to natural language questions from knowledge graphs (KG) have been introduced. However, finding a benchmark that accurately evaluates the quality of a question answering system is a difficult task because of (1) the high degree of variations with respect to the fine-grained properties among the available benchmarks, (2) the static nature of the available benchmarks versus the evolving nature of KGs, and (3) the limited number of KGs targeted by existing benchmarks, which hinders the usability of QA systems in real deployment over KGs that are different from those which the QA system was evaluated using. In this demonstration, we introduce SmartBench, an automatic benchmark generating system for QA over any KG. The benchmark generated by SmartBench is guaranteed to cover all the properties of the natural language questions and queries that were encountered in the literature as long as the targeted KG includes these properties.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

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 science0.0020.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207