MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313247739 · doi:10.23962/ajic.i30.13906

A word embedding trained on South African news data

2022· article· en· W4313247739 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Mafunda, Maria Schuld, Kevin Durrheim, Sindisiwe Mazibuko

Bibliographic record

VenueThe African Journal of Information and Communication (AJIC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsXanadu Quantum Technologies (Canada)
FundersNational Research FoundationDepartment of Science and Innovation, South Africa
KeywordsWord embeddingWord2vecEmbeddingWord (group theory)VocabularyComputer scienceNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)Information retrievalMathematicsLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents results from a study that developed and tested a word embedding trained on a dataset of South African news articles. A word embedding is an algorithm-generated word representation that can be used to analyse the corpus of words that the embedding is trained on. The embedding on which this article is based was generated using the Word2Vec algorithm, which was trained on a dataset of 1.3 million African news articles published between January 2018 and March 2021, containing a vocabulary of approximately 124,000 unique words. The efficacy of this Word2Vec South African news embedding was then tested, and compared to the efficacy provided by the globally used GloVe algorithm. The testing of the local Word2Vec embedding showed that it performed well, with similar efficacy to that provided by GloVe. The South African news word embedding generated by this study is freely available for public use.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe African Journal of Information and Communication (AJIC)Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207