MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007376687 · doi:10.1080/02643294.2013.874994

The nature of compounds: A psychocentric perspective

2014· article· en· W2007376687 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Neuropsychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompoundPerspective (graphical)PsychologyLinguisticsWord (group theory)LexicoCommunicationCognitive scienceCognitive psychologyNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceCognitionComputer scienceNeurosciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although compound words often seem to be words that themselves contain words, this paper argues that this is not the case for the vast majority of lexicalized compounds. Rather, it is claimed that as a result of acts of lexical processing, the constituents of compound words develop into new lexical representations. These representations are bound to specific morphological roles and positions (e.g., head, modifier) within a compound word. The development of these positionally bound compound constituents creates a rich network of lexical knowledge that facilitates compound processing and also creates some of the well-documented patterns in the psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic study of compounding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.312 · 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