MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1568274001

COLOUR TERMS: A PROBLEM FOR TRANSLATORS

2013· article· en· W1568274001 on OpenAlexaff
Carol Stanley-Thorne

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCategorization, perception, and language
Canadian institutionsCrandall University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsComputer scienceMathematicsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colour terms are universal in the sense that every language has a certain number of lexemes that are used to refer to colours in that culture. However, as Berlin and Kay (1969) discovered, languages vary in the number of basic colour terms they have, with that number ranging from as many as eleven to as few as two. The symbolic association of certain colours also varies from one language or culture to another. Therefore, translating material from one language to another poses a potential problem if the translator fails to take into account these differences.

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)0.100
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.345
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1000.345
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0090.021
Scholarly communication0.0120.037
Open science0.0060.015
Research integrity0.0080.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.017

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland)Same topicCategorization, perception, and languageFrench-language works237,207