Latent Beta-Liouville Probabilistic Modeling for Bursty Topic Discovery in Textual Data
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Topic modeling has become a fundamental technique for uncovering latent thematic structures within large collections of textual data. However, conventional models often struggle to capture the burstiness of topics. This characteristic, where the occurrence of a word increases its likelihood of subsequent appearances in a document, is fundamental in natural language processing. To address this gap, we introduce a novel topic modeling framework, integrating Beta-Liouville and Dirichlet Compound Multinomial distributions. Our approach, named Beta-Liouville Dirichlet Compound Multinomial Latent Dirichlet Allocation (BLDCMLDA), is designed to specifically model word burstiness and support a wide range of adaptable topic proportion patterns. Through experiments on diverse benchmark text datasets, the BLDCMLDA model has demonstrated superior performance over conventional models. Our promising results in terms of perplexity and coherence scores demonstrate the effectiveness of BLDCMLDA in capturing the nuances of word usage dynamics in natural language.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it