MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Deep Learning Approach for Semantic Similarity Prediction Between Question Pairs Using Siamese Network and Word Embedding Techniques

2024· article· en· W4400527039 on OpenAlexafffund
Fariha Iffath, Md Shopon, Katie Ovens, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceWord embeddingSemantic similarityArtificial intelligenceSimilarity (geometry)Word (group theory)Natural language processingDeep learningEmbeddingLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Question-answering platforms, such as Quora, Red-dit, and StackOverflow, have become immensely popular in the virtual community. Among these platforms, Quora stands out as a widely utilized and resourceful repository with over 300 million monthly visitors. However, the prevalence of similar questions with paraphrased content poses challenges for users in finding relevant answers. This paper proposes a deep learning approach for predicting the semantic similarity of question pairs to address the issue of duplicate questions. The proposed model employs a Siamese network-based Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) architecture, utilizing word embedding vectors from various algorithms such as Glo Ve, Word2Vec, and FastText. Previous research on duplicate question identification is reviewed, with our approach overcoming drawbacks such as low-level semantic connections and text type incompatibility. After pre-processing the Siamese LSTM network compares the embeddings using L1 distance to determine question pair similarity. The model is trained and evaluated on the Quora Question Pair Classification dataset, and outperformed other state-of-the-art methods with an accuracy of 84.77% with the FastText word embedding.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207