MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401873193 · doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2024.103392

Spatial intelligence and contextual relevance in AI-driven health information retrieval

2024· article· en· W4401873193 on OpenAlexaff
Niko Yiannakoulias

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Geography · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)GeographyInformation retrievalSpatial analysisCartographyData scienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of large language models (LLMs) has already significantly influenced online health information retrieval. As these models gain more widespread use, it is important to understand their ability to contextualize responses based on spatial and geographic information. This study investigates whether LLMs can vary responses based on geographic and spatial context. Using a structured set of prompts submitted to ChatGPT, responses were analyzed to discern patterns based on prompt question and geographic identifiers included in queries. The analysis used word frequency analysis and bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) embeddings to evaluate the variation in responses concerning geographic specificity. The results provide some evidence that LLMs can generate geographically tailored responses when the query specifies such a need, thereby supporting localized information retrieval. Moreover, prompt responses exhibit an association between spatial distance and word frequency/sentence embedding differences between texts. This result suggests a nuanced representation of spatial information, which could impact user experience by providing more relevant health information based on the user's location. This study lays the groundwork for further exploration into the spatial intelligence of LLMs and their impact on the accessibility of health information online. • Large language models, like ChatGPT, can be used to search for health information. • Responses show an association between spatial distance and differences between texts. • ChatGPT may discriminate as to when geographic context matters in responses. • Further work is needed to determine if these results are genralizable

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 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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied GeographySame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207