Intent Identification by Semantically Analyzing the Search Query
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding and analyzing the search intent of a user semantically based on their input query has emerged as an intriguing challenge in recent years. It suffers from small-scale human-labeled training data that produce a very poor hypothesis of rare words. The majority of data portals employ keyword-driven search functionality to explore content within their repositories. However, the keyword-based search cannot identify the users’ search intent accurately. Integrating a query-understandable framework into keyword search engines has the potential to enhance their performance, bridging the gap in interpreting the user’s search intent more effectively. In this study, we have proposed a novel approach that focuses on spatial and temporal information, phrase detection, and semantic similarity recognition to detect the user’s intent from the search query. We have used the n-gram probabilistic language model for phrase detection. Furthermore, we propose a probability-aware gated mechanism for RoBERTa (Robustly Optimized Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers Approach) embeddings to semantically detect the user’s intent. We analyze and compare the performance of the proposed scheme with the existing state-of-the-art schemes. Furthermore, a detailed case study has been conducted to validate the model’s proficiency in semantic analysis, emphasizing its adaptability and potential for real-world applications where nuanced intent understanding is crucial. The experimental result demonstrates that our proposed system can significantly improve the accuracy for detecting the users’ search intent as well as the quality of classification during search.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".