MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6891716374 · doi:10.48448/2n5c-3d59

Multi-Source Multi-Type Knowledge Exploration and Exploitation for Dialogue Generation

2023· other· en· W6891716374 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)ExploitContext (archaeology)GeneralizationFocus (optics)Resource (disambiguation)Knowledge-based systemsKnowledge base

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Open-domain multi-turn dialogue generation encounters the significant challenge of lacking various types of knowledge from diverse sources. Existing models typically focus on identifying specific types of dialogue knowledge and utilize corresponding datasets for training. However, this approach often leads to limited generalization capabilities and increased computational resource requirements. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance on natural language processing tasks. To harness the knowledge storage of LLMs, we propose a framework named KnowEE that explores multi-source multi-type knowledge from LLMs by leveraging diverse datasets and then exploits the obtained knowledge for response generation. Our framework comprises two phases: First, we leverage five external datasets encompassing various types of knowledge to extract the most relevant samples to the dialogue context which are served as prompts to generate corresponding type of knowledge; Second, we inject the acquired knowledge into the ongoing dialogue context in fine-grained and coarse-grained manners, which is then fed into LLMs to generate the final dialogue response. Both automatic and manual evaluation results validate the effectiveness of our framework in exploring and exploiting multi-source multi-type knowledge to generate coherent, informative, and fluent responses.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.132 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→