MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367558144 · doi:10.3390/math11092063

Text Simplification to Specific Readability Levels

2023· article· en· W4367558144 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKing Saud University
KeywordsReadabilityComputer scienceSentenceClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingTask (project management)Text simplificationProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to read a document depends on the reader’s skills and the text’s readability level. In this paper, we propose a system that uses deep learning techniques to simplify texts in order to match a reader’s level. We use a novel approach with a reinforcement learning loop that contains a readability classifier. The classifier’s output is used to decide if more simplification is needed, until the desired readability level is reached. The simplification models are trained on data annotated with readability levels from the Newsela corpus. Our simplification models perform at sentence level, to simplify each sentence to meet the specified readability level. We use a version of the Newsela corpus aligned at the sentence level. We also produce an augmented dataset by automatically annotating more pairs of sentences using a readability-level classifier. Our text simplification models achieve better performance than state-of-the-art techniques for this task.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.220 · 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