Spaces:
Running
Running
|
Download LIMITATIONS.md from Hugdrigo/modelops-research-lab: direct link, hf CLI and curl.
- Browser
- Download file 1.59 kB
-
https://huggingface.co/spaces/Hugdrigo/modelops-research-lab/resolve/main/LIMITATIONS.md
- Command line
-
hf download hf://spaces/Hugdrigo/modelops-research-lab/LIMITATIONS.md
-
curl -L -o LIMITATIONS.md https://huggingface.co/spaces/Hugdrigo/modelops-research-lab/resolve/main/LIMITATIONS.md
1.59 kB
Limitations, safeguards and next research steps
- Synthetic-only benchmarks: accuracy and macro F1 are not estimates of real-world scholarly-document performance.
- Domain shift: the controlled IID set gives substantially higher performance than the fixed novel-pattern challenge. The gap is visible in the app. A prior different Python classifier only reached 35.7% on a 28-sentence PubMed development smoke sample, demonstrating a transfer concern but not a definitive external evaluation for this app.
- Dataset size: the challenge has only 54 rows; small subgroup samples make comparisons fragile.
- Leakage audit: exact text and ID overlap checks cannot rule out shared templates or semantically similar training text.
- Tokenizer constraints: accent normalization and word/character n-grams do not understand discourse context or domain meaning.
- Uncertainty: bootstrap resampling from a fixed synthetic set does not capture selection bias or future deployment shift.
- Scoring: Naive Bayes outputs are not calibrated; cosine scores are not probabilities.
- Fairness: language/domain slice breakdowns are descriptive diagnostics, not equity certification or bias-free evidence.
- Risk: no individual-level consequential use (grading, admissions, hiring, publication acceptance, misconduct allegations).
- External data: a future phase could seek permitted, independent, human-labeled corpora; preserve source licensing and consent as needed. New external scores must come from real executed experiments, never estimated or fabricated.