Integration of Neural Embeddings and Probabilistic Models in Topic Modeling
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, a way to find topics in large volumes of text, has grown with the help of deep learning. This paper presents two novel approaches to topic modeling by integrating embeddings derived from Bert-Topic with the multi-grain clustering topic model (MGCTM). Recognizing the inherent hierarchical and multi-scale nature of topics in corpora, our methods utilize MGCTM to capture topic structures at multiple levels of granularity. We enhance the expressiveness of MGCTM by introducing the Generalized Dirichlet and Beta-Liouville distributions as priors, which provide greater flexibility in modeling topic proportions and capturing richer topic relationships. Comprehensive experiments on various datasets showcase the effectiveness of our proposed models in achieving superior topic coherence and granularity compared to state-of-the-art methods. Our findings underscore the potential of leveraging hybrid architectures, marrying neural embeddings with advanced probabilistic modeling, to push the boundaries of topic modeling.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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