Gerund versus Infinitive as Complement of Transitive Verbs in English
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'auteur s'interesse, en anglais, a deux types particuliers de complements du verbe principal : le gerondif et l'infinitif (I tried closing/to close my eyes). Il cherche a fournir une explication aux comportements de ces deux types de complements directs a partir de donnees semantiques. La distinction grammaticale entre le gerondif et l'infinitif peut s'expliquer de deux manieres : 1. en termes de temps selon une opposition temporelle entre les notions de simultaneite (gerondif) et de futur (infinitif), 2. en termes de controle. Sur ce second point, l'auteur analyse plus particulierement le cas plus complexe des constructions faisant intervenir un objet direct propositionnel tel que : John got Bill to play/playing tennis ou le verbe gerondif ou infinitif ne constitue pas directement l'objet du verbe matriciel. Dans ce cas, le sujet du verbe -ing ou to- ne peut plus etre coreferentiel a celui du verbe matriciel
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it