MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388422667 · doi:10.18280/isi.280530

Leveraging Latent Dirichlet Allocation for Feature Extraction in User Comments: Enhancements to User-Centered Design in Indonesian Financial Technology

2023· article· en· W4388422667 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatent Dirichlet allocationIndonesianComputer scienceDirichlet distributionTopic modelData miningInformation retrievalMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The burgeoning Financial Technology (FinTech) sector in Indonesia, while witnessing a surge in user base, contends with limitations in system functionalities and service offerings.The extraction of latent features from user comments is imperative for the identification of these inadequacies, serving as a catalyst for innovation and delivering advantages to both consumers and developers of FinTech applications.This study employs Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) algorithm, an intelligent probabilistic model, to discern and extract underlying topics within narratives found in user comments on FinTech platforms.In this approach, words within each topic are ranked according to their respective probabilities.Through the LDA algorithm, ten salient topics, each comprising ten keywords, have been identified.These topics coalesce into three broad categories: system improvements in applications, services that are out of sync with the system, and service satisfaction.The coherence of the topics has been quantitatively assessed, with an average score of 0.564, indicative of substantial coherence.Findings from the LDA model are integrated into the User-Centered Design (UCeD) framework, wherein the algorithm streamlines the UCeD's evaluative and abstraction processes, as well as the grouping of user necessities.This integration aids FinTech management teams in pinpointing pertinent user feedback, thereby facilitating the refinement of application development.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.266 · 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