-
Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022)
0.43
0.42677948 = product of:
0.6401692 = sum of:
0.04818983 = product of:
0.14456949 = sum of:
0.14456949 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14456949 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25723282 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14456949 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14456949 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25723282 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.14456949 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14456949 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25723282 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.013701428 = product of:
0.041104283 = sum of:
0.041104283 = weight(_text_:quality in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041104283 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1371613 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5206327 = idf(docFreq=1307, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.29967844 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5206327 = idf(docFreq=1307, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14456949 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14456949 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25723282 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.14456949 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14456949 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25723282 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.6666667 = coord(6/9)
- Abstract
- This research revisits the classic Turing test and compares recent large language models such as ChatGPT for their abilities to reproduce human-level comprehension and compelling text generation. Two task challenges- summary and question answering- prompt ChatGPT to produce original content (98-99%) from a single text entry and sequential questions initially posed by Turing in 1950. We score the original and generated content against the OpenAI GPT-2 Output Detector from 2019, and establish multiple cases where the generated content proves original and undetectable (98%). The question of a machine fooling a human judge recedes in this work relative to the question of "how would one prove it?" The original contribution of the work presents a metric and simple grammatical set for understanding the writing mechanics of chatbots in evaluating their readability and statistical clarity, engagement, delivery, overall quality, and plagiarism risks. While Turing's original prose scores at least 14% below the machine-generated output, whether an algorithm displays hints of Turing's true initial thoughts (the "Lovelace 2.0" test) remains unanswerable.
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
-
Luo, L.; Ju, J.; Li, Y.-F.; Haffari, G.; Xiong, B.; Pan, S.: ChatRule: mining logical rules with large language models for knowledge graph reasoning (2023)
0.01
0.00587207 = product of:
0.026424315 = sum of:
0.01614729 = product of:
0.048441865 = sum of:
0.048441865 = weight(_text_:quality in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048441865 = score(doc=1171,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1371613 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5206327 = idf(docFreq=1307, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.35317445 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.5206327 = idf(docFreq=1307, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.010277025 = product of:
0.02055405 = sum of:
0.02055405 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02055405 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10624962 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Logical rules are essential for uncovering the logical connections between relations, which could improve the reasoning performance and provide interpretable results on knowledge graphs (KGs). Although there have been many efforts to mine meaningful logical rules over KGs, existing methods suffer from the computationally intensive searches over the rule space and a lack of scalability for large-scale KGs. Besides, they often ignore the semantics of relations which is crucial for uncovering logical connections. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance in the field of natural language processing and various applications, owing to their emergent ability and generalizability. In this paper, we propose a novel framework, ChatRule, unleashing the power of large language models for mining logical rules over knowledge graphs. Specifically, the framework is initiated with an LLM-based rule generator, leveraging both the semantic and structural information of KGs to prompt LLMs to generate logical rules. To refine the generated rules, a rule ranking module estimates the rule quality by incorporating facts from existing KGs. Last, a rule validator harnesses the reasoning ability of LLMs to validate the logical correctness of ranked rules through chain-of-thought reasoning. ChatRule is evaluated on four large-scale KGs, w.r.t. different rule quality metrics and downstream tasks, showing the effectiveness and scalability of our method.
- Date
- 23.11.2023 19:07:22
-
Isaac, A.; Raemy, J.A.; Meijers, E.; Valk, S. De; Freire, N.: Metadata aggregation via linked data : results of the Europeana Common Culture project (2020)
0.00
0.0011901074 = product of:
0.010710967 = sum of:
0.010710967 = product of:
0.021421934 = sum of:
0.021421934 = weight(_text_:web in 39) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021421934 = score(doc=39,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09901874 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 39, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=39)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
- Abstract
- Digital cultural heritage resources are widely available on the web through the digital libraries of heritage institutions. To address the difficulties of discoverability in cultural heritage, the common practice is metadata aggregation, where centralized efforts like Europeana facilitate discoverability by collecting the resources' metadata. We present the results of the linked data aggregation task conducted within the Europeana Common Culture project, which attempted an innovative approach to aggregation based on linked data made available by cultural heritage institutions. This task ran for one year with participation of eleven organizations, involving the three member roles of the Europeana network: data providers, intermediary aggregators, and the central aggregation hub, Europeana. We report on the challenges that were faced by data providers, the standards and specifications applied, and the resulting aggregated metadata.
-
Breuer, T.; Tavakolpoursaleh, N.; Schaer, P.; Hienert, D.; Schaible, J.; Castro, L.J.: Online Information Retrieval Evaluation using the STELLA Framework (2022)
0.00
0.0011901074 = product of:
0.010710967 = sum of:
0.010710967 = product of:
0.021421934 = sum of:
0.021421934 = weight(_text_:web in 640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021421934 = score(doc=640,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09901874 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 640, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=640)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
- Abstract
- Involving users in early phases of software development has become a common strategy as it enables developers to consider user needs from the beginning. Once a system is in production, new opportunities to observe, evaluate and learn from users emerge as more information becomes available. Gathering information from users to continuously evaluate their behavior is a common practice for commercial software, while the Cranfield paradigm remains the preferred option for Information Retrieval (IR) and recommendation systems in the academic world. Here we introduce the Infrastructures for Living Labs STELLA project which aims to create an evaluation infrastructure allowing experimental systems to run along production web-based academic search systems with real users. STELLA combines user interactions and log files analyses to enable large-scale A/B experiments for academic search.
-
Peponakis, M.; Mastora, A.; Kapidakis, S.; Doerr, M.: Expressiveness and machine processability of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) : an analysis of concepts and relations (2020)
0.00
9.917562E-4 = product of:
0.008925806 = sum of:
0.008925806 = product of:
0.017851612 = sum of:
0.017851612 = weight(_text_:web in 5787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017851612 = score(doc=5787,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09901874 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.030341174 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5787, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5787)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
- Abstract
- This study considers the expressiveness (that is the expressive power or expressivity) of different types of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) and discusses its potential to be machine-processable in the context of the Semantic Web. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations of KOS are reviewed based on conceptualizations introduced by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) and the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS); natural language processing techniques are also implemented. Applying a comparative analysis, the dataset comprises a thesaurus (Eurovoc), a subject headings system (LCSH) and a classification scheme (DDC). These are compared with an ontology (CIDOC-CRM) by focusing on how they define and handle concepts and relations. It was observed that LCSH and DDC focus on the formalism of character strings (nomens) rather than on the modelling of semantics; their definition of what constitutes a concept is quite fuzzy, and they comprise a large number of complex concepts. By contrast, thesauri have a coherent definition of what constitutes a concept, and apply a systematic approach to the modelling of relations. Ontologies explicitly define diverse types of relations, and are by their nature machine-processable. The paper concludes that the potential of both the expressiveness and machine processability of each KOS is extensively regulated by its structural rules. It is harder to represent subject headings and classification schemes as semantic networks with nodes and arcs, while thesauri are more suitable for such a representation. In addition, a paradigm shift is revealed which focuses on the modelling of relations between concepts, rather than the concepts themselves.
