Feature Extraction and Prediction of Combined Text and Survey Data using Two-Staged Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning (DL) based natural language processing (NLP) has recently grown as one the fastest research domain and retained remarkable improvement in many applications. Due to the significant amount of data, the adaptation of feature learning and symmetric data efficiency is a critical underlying task in such applications. However, their ability to extract features is limited due to a lack of proper model formation. Moreover, the use of these methods on smaller datasets is unexplored and underdeveloped compared to more popular research areas. This work introduces a two-stage modeling approach to combine classical statistical analysis with NLP problems in a real-world dataset. We effectively layout a combination of the classical statistical model incorporating a stacked ensemble classifier and a DL framework of convolutional neural network (CNN) and Bidirectional Recurrent Neural Networks (Bi-RNN) to structure a more decomposed architecture with lower computational complexity. Additionally, the experimental results illustrating 96.69 % training and 70.56 % testing accuracy and hypothesis testing from our DL models followed by an ablation study empirically demonstrate the validation of our proposed combined modeling technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".