MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044880418 · doi:10.1075/lplp.38.3.04gob

Interlinguistics and Esperanto studies at universities

2014· article· en· W2044880418 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Problems & Language Planning · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLinguistic Studies and Language Acquisition
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis
KeywordsPolitical scienceLanguage planningHigher educationBologna ProcessPedagogyClass (philosophy)SociologyLinguisticsPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After 2010, following the Bologna process and the so-called ‘Gelmini reform’, universities in Italy were subjected to deep changes in administration, in research and education. The course in ‘Language Planning and Planned Languages’ was established in 2011–2012, under the initiative of the Istituto Italiano d’Esperanto and with the financial support of the Esperantic Studies Foundation, as a follow-up of the course in ‘Interlinguistics and Esperantic Studies’ offered by Prof. Emeritus Fabrizio A. Pennacchietti in the preceeding 15 years. This article reports on the structure, content and results of the course in its first three academic years, with a special attention to the methodological innovations in language teaching which were utilized in the class, and which might be useful for similar initiatives in other universities in Europe and abroad.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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