The Work of Secondness as Habit in the Development of Early Schemes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This inquiry demonstrates the pivotal place of attentional phenomena in associating sign, Object, and Interpretant in Secondness. It identifies overt attentional habits (Indexes) and how they are modified/replaced in favor of more covert ones (symbols). The role of Peirce’s Object in securing attentional patterns to affairs in Secondness is highlighted. Alterations in use of attentional artifacts determine the kind and degree of reasoning. While use of Indexical signs in Secondness promotes assumptions of co-occurring cause-effect relations, use of symbols in Thirdness facilitates attenuation between cause and effect. As such, agency (human or otherwise) fails to wholly account for assignment of novel Interpretants to ground triads, particularly when the Object does so. Findings illustrate how unexpected eventualities in Secondness call for reconstruction of premises and inductive experimentation, and as such, how recognition of regularities in Secondness re-emerge to renovate patterns of reasoning – from diagrammatic to abductive reasoning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it