MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7101217644

Author manuscript, published in "Culture and Identity in Knowledge Organization, Montréal: Canada (2008)" Information Filtering as a Knowledge Organization process: techniques and evaluation

2010· article· en· W7101217644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Architecture and Usability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimension (graph theory)Point (geometry)Identity (music)Knowledge organizationField (mathematics)Order (exchange)Information systemKnowledge-based systems
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we are concerned by a field which represents an intellectual, social, and economic practice, strongly linked to a semi-automatic knowledge organization. lnformational Competitive lntelligence is characterized by two major distinctive features: transition from the classical activity of Information Retrieval to organised lnformation Filtering, then conversion of filtered information into Knowledge to help decision making. In the paper, we first show that information filtering systems may be considered as semi-automatic knowledge organization devices in the business intelligence context. Then, we point out how the technical dimension of the system must be arranged with the user dimension in order to approach a real relevance. Finally, we present the overview of the lnfile evaluation campaign which represents an attempt to validate our approach. 1.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1930.026

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Architecture and UsabilityFrench-language works237,207