MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021089578 · doi:10.1353/dic.2012.0004

Revising The Dictionary of Canadianisms on Historical Principles : A Progress Report, 2006—(April) 2012

2012· article· en· W2021089578 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stefan Dollinger, Laurel J. Brinton, Margery Fee

Bibliographic record

VenueDictionaries · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilestoneComputer scienceLibrary scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Operations researchArtificial intelligenceHistoryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper takes stock of the accomplishments of the project to revise and update the Dictionary of Canadianisms on Historical Principles (1967; DCHP-1 ), which was first presented at the Dictionary Society of North America's 2007 annual meeting in Chicago. The five years since have seen a drastic shift in the dictionary market, and as a result, the updated edition ( DCHP-2 ) is entirely an online project. A milestone towards the new edition—an online version of the first edition ( DCHP-1 Online )— was completed in 2011 will be released to be published on 28 January 2013. This paper introduces the tools developed for the new edition—the Dictionary Editing Tool (editing software) and the Bank of Canadian English (quotation file). It then explains the selection criteria for digital data harvesting, which is the main source of data for the new edition, describes the project's connection to undergraduate and graduate teaching and, most importantly, proposes a revised five-tiered classification scheme for Canadianisms, which is the backbone of the new edition. A Dictionary of Canadianisms on Historical Principles ( DCHP-1 ; Avis et al., 1967) was one of the first historical dictionaries of English produced outside of the UK or the USA, and it served as a national icon for some time. It was the flagship in the "Dictionary of Canadian English" series published by W.J. Gage (now Nelson Education); this series, begun in 1962, produced Canadian-made dictionaries and enjoyed great support by linguists and dialectologists, including the Canadian Linguistic Association. Following the publication of DCHP-1 in 1967, Raven I. McDavid, then editor of the Linguistic Atlas of the United States and Canada , stated confidently that DCHP-1 "unlike most of the other historical dictionaries, is committed to frequent and adequate revision" (McDavid 1970: 289). Flash forward 45 years, and no revised version has yet seen the light of day; indeed, until some six years ago, DCHP-1 had all but vanished from public and scholarly perception. But since 2006, important steps have been taken to revive the dictionary and to bring it into the digital age (see Dollinger 2006; Barber and Considine 2010). In this paper we will contextualize the current project, located at the University of British Columbia at Vancouver, starting with a brief history of DCHP-1 , and then detail the progress that has been made towards a revised dictionary, DCHP-2 . The DCHP project has two goals: the first is to produce an open-access online version of DCHP-1 . The second is to bring DCHP-1 up to date by adding recent Canadianisms and filling major gaps in historical coverage. In July 2011 we accomplished the first goal —DCHP-1 Online (Dollinger et al. 2011)—except for the completion of the licensing agreement with Nelson Education, the copyright holder of DCHP-1 . Such agreement has been finalized in the summer of 2012 and was signed on 1 October 2012. Contrary to early plans, ideas of a paper version were abandoned in 2007, and DCHP-2 will be entirely an online product, accessible to all without charge.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0110.017
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDictionariesSame topicLexicography and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207