MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981103995 · doi:10.1111/1467-968x.00110

Choice Between the Overt and the Covert

2003· article· en· W1981103995 on OpenAlexaff
Liejiong Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Philological Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovertNull (SQL)Subject (documents)Object (grammar)Feature (linguistics)LinguisticsComputer scienceNull hypothesisPosition (finance)PsychologyNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatisticsPhilosophyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article addresses the three factors involved in choosing between overt and null forms. The choice may be lexically controlled or uncontrolled; it may be grammatically determined or undetermined; it may be contextually sensitive or free. Each position of a syntactic structure can be characterised by means of three binary features [±L], [±G], [±C]. In some respects, feature characterisation has an advantage over the familiar approach of identifying a null subject or a null object as one of the four standard empty categories. It provides a mechanism for revealing important differences and similarities between languages and guarding against overgeneralisation and undergeneralisation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations51
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Philological SocietySame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207