Data-Centric Content Classification of Smart City Residential Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The residential services in the context of smart cities accu- mulate massive real-time inquiry data in natural language to describe the services in need. Such inquiry requests have diverse topics in the content and considerable variate length. Besides, the responsible departments that may handle the inquiry involve a large number of organizations, from metropolitan administration to local communities. Hence accumu- lated request data is primary and central to the service of accurately dispatching requests to responsible departments. The challenge is de- vising a data centric approach to fit the data with SOTA models and improve the request classification accuracy. In this paper, we analyze the factors of embedding tokens, data segmentation, model structures, and classification methods. We devise a unified modelling process with mul- tiple dataflows that combine these factors to observe their interactions. The experiment results demonstrate the compound effects and provide insights into how SOTA models respond differently to variations in these factors. The observations allow us to fine-tune the learning task at each stage and achieve a maximum 82.4% F1-Score. </p>
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".