MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386942653 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.10880

Classifying Organizations for Food System Ontologies using Natural Language Processing

2023· preprint· en· W4386942653 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tianyu Jiang, Sonia Vinogradova, Nathan Stringham, E. Louise Earl, Allan D. Hollander, Patrick R. Huber, Ellen Riloff, R. Sandra Schillo, Giorgio A. Ubbiali, Matthew Lange

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingGovernment (linguistics)Information retrievalData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our research explores the use of natural language processing (NLP) methods to automatically classify entities for the purpose of knowledge graph population and integration with food system ontologies. We have created NLP models that can automatically classify organizations with respect to categories associated with environmental issues as well as Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes, which are used by the U.S. government to characterize business activities. As input, the NLP models are provided with text snippets retrieved by the Google search engine for each organization, which serves as a textual description of the organization that is used for learning. Our experimental results show that NLP models can achieve reasonably good performance for these two classification tasks, and they rely on a general framework that could be applied to many other classification problems as well. We believe that NLP models represent a promising approach for automatically harvesting information to populate knowledge graphs and aligning the information with existing ontologies through shared categories and concepts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.483
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207