Treffers-Daller, Jeanine and Willemyns, Ronald (eds.), <i>Language Contact at the Romance-Germanic Language Border</i>. Clevedon/Buffalo/Toronto/Sydney: Multilingual Matters, 2002, 149 pp. 1 85359 627 2. (Also available as Volume 23, Nos 1&2 of the <i>Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development</i>.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treffers-Daller, Jeanine and Willemyns, Ronald (eds.), Language Contact at the Romance-Germanic Language Border. Clevedon/Buffalo/Toronto/Sydney: Multilingual Matters, 2002, 149 pp. 1 85359 627 2. (Also available as Volume 23, Nos 1&2 of the Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development.) - Volume 13 Issue 3
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Book review of a linguistics volume; criticism of one book, not a study of research.
The item is a bibliographic review of a language-contact book and does not study research itself.
Bibliographic book notice on Romance–Germanic language contact; linguistics, not study of research practice.
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.066 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".