MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034866327 · doi:10.1080/10350330.2013.799003

Semiotizing a product into a brand

2013· article· en· W2034866327 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

VenueSocial Semiotics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSemiotics and Representation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSloganLogo (programming language)Sign (mathematics)Brand managementAdvertisingProduct (mathematics)Rhetorical questionOrder (exchange)Brand extensionCode (set theory)Computer scienceBrand awarenessBusinessMarketingLinguisticsPolitical scienceMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A product is simply something that is material or substance of some kind. In order to be transformed into a brand with its own code of meanings and system of rhetorical allusions, it needs to be semiotized. And the marketing and advertising industries have become semioticians in this sense, semiotizing a product by assigning it a name, a visual sign (logo), a system of language forms (slogan, taglines, etc.), and then textualizing the brand by creating appropriate ads and commercials for it. This paper will show how this network of semiotizing events coheres into an overall macrotext to produce the brand as a sign system.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.233 · 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