MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412376911 · doi:10.1145/3726302.3730281

Gosling Grows Up: Retrieval with Learned Dense and Sparse Representations Using Anserini

2025· article· en· W4412376911 on OpenAlexaff
Jimmy Lin, Carlos Lassance, Xueguang Ma, Ronak Pradeep, Tommaso Teofili, Jasper Xian, Jheng-Hong Yang, Vincent Zhong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Anserini IR toolkit has come a long way since efforts began in 2015. Although the goals of the project - to bridge research and practice in information retrieval, and to provide reproducible, easy-to-use baselines - have remained constant, the world has changed quite a bit. We discuss how Anserini has evolved in response to this changing environment, the most significant of which is the advent of transformer-based retrieval models that did not exist when the project started. The bi-encoder architecture provides a framework for understanding retrieval models based on dense and sparse vector representations, and offers a reference for conveying the capabilities of our toolkit. Anserini provides end-to-end first-stage retrieval based on single-vector learned dense and sparse representations, directly building on the open-source Lucene search library and the ONNX runtime. This minimal design accelerates the pace of research and fosters reproducibility, enabling ''two-click reproductions''. By better aligning research and practice, we increase the potential real-world impact of research innovations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.010

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207