MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416780702 · doi:10.1016/j.esmorw.2025.100615

419P Development of the user-friendly decision aid rule-based evaluation and support tool (REST) for optimizing the resources of an information extraction task

2025· article· en· W4416780702 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Akram Redjdal, Guillaume Bazin, Xavier Tannier, Fanny Adda, Ariel Cohen, Emmanuelle Kempf

Bibliographic record

VenueESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsejo Superior de Investigaciones CientíficasUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterCentre hospitalier universitaire Sainte-JustineFundação ChampalimaudUniversidad de Buenos Aires
KeywordsTask (project management)Information extractionDevelopment (topology)Task analysisNatural languageDecision support system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural language processing (NLP) methods are available for information extraction (IE) tasks from free texts, such as rules, machine learning (ML), and large language models (LLM). They differ in terms of sustainability, transferability, interpretability, and development burden. We aimed to develop and validate a user-friendly decision aid tool for NLP agnostic annotators to assess the best IE method.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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 venueESMO Real World Data and Digital OncologySame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207