Cao Robot for Taiwanese/English Knowledge Graph Application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a Content Attention Ontology (CAO) robot for constructing Taiwanese/English Knowledge Graphs (KGs) by prompting audio or texts to Large Language Models (LLMs), including TAIDE, Zephyr, and Llama 3.1. The collected data includes lecture videos from the IEEE WCCI 2024 in Japan and the 2024 National Language Development Forum in Taiwan, along with students' learning data from the 2024 Summer School on Taiwanese/English Human and Robot Co-Learning at Rende Elementary School (RDES). In addition, the fundamental concepts of Computational Intelligence (CI) and Quantum CI (QCI) learning were incorporated into the study. The generative KGs highlight important concepts, relations, and communities within the collected teaching and learning data. Additionally, we utilized data from subjects wearing braincomputer interface (BCI) devices while speaking Taiwanese/English to generate KGs. We also compared the differences in these KGs and analyzed the similarities between the transcribed texts of lectures and learners. In the future, we plan to expand the CAO robot to more validation fields across Taiwan, aiming to engage young students in speaking Taiwanese while concurrently enhancing their English language skills through interaction with the robot.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".