MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416033663 · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.tsar-1.9

OneNRC@TSAR2025 Shared Task Small Models for Readability Controlled Text Simplification

2025· article· W4416033663 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReadabilityTask (project management)Text simplificationFeature (linguistics)Task analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this system description paper, we describe the team OneNRC's experiments on readability controlled text simplification, focused on using smaller, quantized language models (< 20B).We compare these with one large proprietary model and show that the smaller models offer comparable results in some experimental settings.The approach primarily comprises of an agentic workflow, and tool calling.The best results were achieved while using a CEFR proficiency classifier as a verification tool for the language model agent.In terms of comparison with other systems, our submission that used a quantized Gemma3:12B model that ran on a laptop achieved a rank of 9.88 among the submitted systems as per the AUTORANK framework used by the organizers.We hope these results will lead into further exploration on the usefulness of smaller models for text simplification.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicText Readability and SimplificationFrench-language works237,207