MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384694635 · doi:10.1017/s1351324923000360

Describe the house and I will tell you the price: House price prediction with textual description data

2023· article· en· W4384694635 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Language Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWord2vecComputer scienceHouse priceBoosting (machine learning)Word embeddingArtificial intelligenceWord (group theory)Machine learningInformation retrievalData miningNatural language processingEmbeddingEconometricsLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract House price prediction is an important problem that could benefit home buyers and sellers. Traditional models for house price prediction use numerical attributes such as the number of rooms but disregard the house description text. The recent developments in text processing suggest these can be valuable attributes, which motivated us to use house descriptions. This paper focuses on the house asking/advertising price and studies the impact of using house description texts to predict the final house price. To achieve this, we collected a large and diverse set of attributes on house postings, including the house advertising price. Then, we compare the performance of three scenarios: using only the house description, only numeric attributes, or both. We processed the description text through three word embedding techniques: TF-IDF, Word2Vec, and BERT. Four regression algorithms are trained using only textual data, non-textual data, or both. Our results show that by using exclusively the description data with Word2Vec and a Deep Learning model, we can achieve good performance. However, the best overall performance is obtained when using both textual and non-textual features. An $R^2$ of 0.7904 is achieved by the deep learning model using only description data on the testing data. This clearly indicates that using the house description text alone is a strong predictor for the house price. However, when observing the RMSE on the test data, the best model was gradient boosting using both numeric and description data. Overall, we observe that combining the textual and non-textual features improves the learned model and provides performance benefits when compared against using only one of the feature types. We also provide a freely available application for house price prediction, which is solely based on a house text description and uses our final developed model with Word2Vec and Deep Learning to predict the house price.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.172 · 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