-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
What if Impact Statement is not a h1? #11
Comments
Sample from 9f1d5659d5880fb427f6e04ae500fc25: </section>
<section class="deo:Conclusion">
<h1 class="DoCO:SectionTitle" id="187" page="9" column="1">5 CONCLUSION</h1>
<region class="DoCO:TextChunk" id="188" page="9" column="1">We incorporated discrete variables into neural variational without analytically integrating them out or reparametrizing and running stochastic backpropagation on them. Applied to a recurrent, neural topic model, our approach maintains the discrete topic assignments, yielding a simple yet effective way to learn thematic vs. non-thematic (e.g., syntactic) word dynamics. Our approach outperforms previous approaches on language understanding and other topic modeling measures.</region>
<outsider class="DoCO:TextBox" type="page_nr" id="189" page="9" column="1">9</outsider>
<section class="DoCO:Section">
<h2 class="DoCO:SectionTitle" id="190" confidence="possible" page="10" column="1">Broader Impact</h2>
<region class="DoCO:TextChunk" id="191" page="10" column="1">The model used in this paper is fundamentally an associative-based language model. While NVI does provide some degree of regularization, a significant component of the training criteria is still a cross-entropy loss. Further, this paper’s model does not examine adjusting this cross-entropy component. As such, the text the model is trained on can influence the types of implicit biases that are transmitted to the learned syntactic component (the RNN/representations h t ), the learned thematic component (the topic matrix β and topic modeling variables θ and z t ), and the tradeoff(s) between these two dynamics ( l t and ρ ). For comparability, this work used available datasets that have been previously published on. Based upon this work’s goals, there was not an in-depth exploration into any biases within those datasets. Note however that the thematic vs. non-thematic aspect of this work provides a potential avenue for examining this. While we treated l t as a binary indicator, future work could involve a more nuanced, gradient view. Direct interpretability of the individual components of the model is mixed. While the topic weights can clearly be inspected and analyzed directly, the same is not as easy for the RNN component. While lacking a direct way to inspect the overall decoding model, our approach does provide insight into the thematic component. We view the model as capturing thematic vs. non-thematic dynamics, though in keeping with previous work, for evaluation we approximated this with non-stopword vs. stopword dynamics. Within topic modeling stop-word handling is generally considered simply a preprocessing problem (or obviated by neural networks), we believe that preprocessing is an important element of a downstream user’s workflow that is not captured when preprocessing is treated as a stand-alone, perhaps boring step. We argue that future work can examine how different elements of a user’s workflow, such as preprocessing, can be handled with our approach.</region>
</section>
<section class="DoCO:Section">
<h2 class="DoCO:SectionTitle" id="192" confidence="possible" page="10" column="1">Acknowledgements and Funding Disclosure</h2>
<region class="DoCO:TextChunk" id="193" confidence="possible" page="10" column="1">We would like to thank members and affiliates of the UMBC CSEE Department, including Edward Raff, Cynthia Matuszek, Erfan Noury and Ahmad Mousavi. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments, questions, and suggestions. Some experiments were conducted on the UMBC HPCF. We’d also like to thank the reviewers for their comments and suggestions. This material is based in part upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. IIS-1940931. This material is also based on research that is in part supported by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), DARPA, for the KAIROS program under agreement number FA8750-19-2-1003. The U.S.Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation thereon. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either express or implied, of the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), DARPA, or the U.S. Government.</region>
</section>
</section> And 7a43ed4e82d06a1e6b2e88518fb8c2b0: <section class="DoCO:Section">
<h2 class="DoCO:SectionTitle" id="161" confidence="possible" page="9" column="1">7 Broader Impact</h2>
<region class="DoCO:TextChunk" id="164" page="9" column="1">Learning a best arm is a fundamental, well-studied, problem largely because it captures the most basic experimental question: given n treatments, each with a stochastic outcome, which one is best? Cancer treatment, drug discovery, gene detection, manufacturing quality assurance, financial fraud detection, spam detection, software testing, are all examples of direct applications of learning a best arm. Providing dramatically faster algorithms for these applications without compromising on guarantees will impact areas well outside machine learning. Specifically, this work provides an algorithm that is 6000 times faster than the state-of-the-art. In addition to asymptotic bounds that converge as the number of arms grows to what we conjecture is the optimal sample complexity, we provide dramatic speedups for any number of arms. The result is an extremely efficient simple algorithm for learning <marker type="page" number="10"/><marker type="block"/> a best arm with strong theoretical guarantees that can be used across all applications of learning a best arm. The simplicity and speed of the algorithms presented here are such that any practitioner can implement them and accelerate their experimental setup immediately. We trust that we will see immediate action across a broad set of application domains.</region>
<outsider class="DoCO:TextBox" type="page_nr" id="163" page="9" column="1">9</outsider>
</section> So in these two cases it doesn't look like there is an |
Changing The below is a sample from 9f1d5659d5880fb427f6e04ae500fc25
|
Yes, need go go one layer deeper than for section in root[1][1]:
for child in section:
for smaller in child:
print(smaller.text) |
This seems to be partially resolved in 715ab09. Out of the 4 cited examples:
All except |
@paulsedille have a look 😄 |
Simply duplicated the for loop that went through h1 headers to also look through h2. This increases the computational load of the script. But it increases the perceived accuracy.
Describe the bug
The BIS title is not contained in an
<h1>
tag (e.g. there is a more general “Conclusion”<h1>
tag or just bad xml tagging) and therefore it is not scrapedTo Reproduce
Papers that this problem occurs in:
<h2>
)<h2>
)<h2>
)<region>
tag, no title)Expected behavior
The code should be able to find the impact statement even if it is not in the
h1
tag.Proposed fix
look for a BIS through
<h2>
tags as well, or simply pull any text content that contains “broader impact”?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: