MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983562473 · doi:10.1142/s0129183114500132

A model of language inflection graphs

2013· article· en· W1983562473 on OpenAlexaff
Henryk Fukś, Babak Farzad, Yi Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics C · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflectionInflection pointBipartite graphLattice (music)MathematicsGraphComputer scienceProjection (relational algebra)CombinatoricsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflection graphs are highly complex networks representing relationships between inflectional forms of words in human languages. For so-called synthetic languages, such as Latin or Polish, they have particularly interesting structure due to the abundance of inflectional forms. We construct the simplest form of inflection graphs, namely a bipartite graph in which one group of vertices corresponds to dictionary headwords and the other group to inflected forms encountered in a given text. We, then, study projection of this graph on the set of headwords. The projection decomposes into a large number of connected components, to be called word groups. Distribution of sizes of word group exhibits some remarkable properties, resembling cluster distribution in a lattice percolation near the critical point. We propose a simple model which produces graphs of this type, reproducing the desired component distribution and other topological features.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics CSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207