MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1486648063 · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-33419-6_3

Information Levels and Barriers

2006· book-chapter· en· W1486648063 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolutionary Bioinformatics · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)ConventionCode (set theory)Sequence (biology)Space (punctuation)Computer scienceHead (geology)CommunicationLinguisticsGenealogyPhilosophySociologyHistoryProgramming languageEpistemologyLawPolitical scienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aristotle wrote that the form-giving essence, the eidos, “docs not become part of the embryo, just as no part of the carpenter enters the wood he works ... but the form is imparted by him to the material” [2,3]. A carpenter will often hold the information for imparting form to wood in his head. If he wishes to communicate this information to other carpenters separated tram himself in space and time he has to choose symbols and a code. The symbols, D, O, and W, if repeated and arranged in the sequence W, O, O, and O, would be meaningless unless the receiver knew the transmitting carpenter’s code. Thus, implicit to the information concept is the idea that a grouping of symbols can have a meaning, and that there can be a linkage (“mapping”) between the grouping and the meaning, which we call a code (an understood convention).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.163 · 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