LLM-Enhanced Framework for Building Domain-Specific Lexicon for Urban Power Grid Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional methods for urban power grid design have struggled to meet the demands of multi-energy integration and high resilience scenarios due to issues such as delayed updates of terminology and semantic ambiguity. Current techniques for constructing domain-specific lexicons face challenges like the insufficient coverage of specialized vocabulary and imprecise synonym mining, which restrict the semantic parsing capabilities of intelligent design systems. To address these challenges, this study proposes a framework for constructing a domain-specific lexicon for urban power grid design based on Large Language Models (LLMs). The aim is to enhance the accuracy and practicality of the lexicon through multi-level term extraction and synonym expansion. Initially, a structured corpus covering national and industry standards in the field of power was constructed. An improved Term Frequency–Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) algorithm, combined with mutual information and adjacency entropy filtering mechanisms, was utilized to extract high-quality seed vocabulary from 3426 candidate terms. Leveraging LLMs, multi-level prompt templates were designed to guide synonym mining, incorporating a self-correction mechanism for semantic verification to mitigate errors caused by model hallucinations. This approach successfully built a domain-specific lexicon comprising 3426 core seed words and 10,745 synonyms. The average cosine similarity of synonym pairs reached 0.86, and expert validation confirmed an accuracy rate of 89.3%; text classification experiments showed that integrating the domain-specific dictionary improved the classifier’s F1-score by 9.2%, demonstrating the effectiveness of the method. This research innovatively constructs a high-precision terminology dictionary in the field of power design for the first time through embedding domain-driven constraints and validation workflows, solving the problems of insufficient coverage and imprecise expansion of traditional methods, and supporting the development of semantically intelligent systems for smart urban power grid design, with significant practical application value.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".