MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084584356 · doi:10.7202/1027778ar

Anthropological Encounters of a Semiotic Kind

2014· article· en· W2084584356 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Richard J. Parmentier

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sémiotiques · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemioticsIdeologySign (mathematics)Perspective (graphical)Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)SociologyEpistemologyKey (lock)LinguisticsAestheticsLiteraturePhilosophyArtLawVisual artsPoliticsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article prints for the first time two oral presentations occasioned by visits to Brandeis University by the medievalist Brigitte Miriam Bedos-Rezak and the classicist Gregory Nagy. The path-breaking and authoritative papers and books by these two scholars provide key insights for anthropologists working from a semiotic perspective. Bedos-Rezak’s proposal that the practice of sealing documents in pre-scholastic France can be seen as evidence for a general semiotic ideology of the “imprint” raises the possibility that the systematicity of sign processes and corresponding metasemiotic discourses reflects esoteric attempts to conceal pragmatic variability in favour of nostalgic coherence. Similarly, Nagy’s insistence on the importance of the performance contexts for the shaping of the Homeric epics is grounded in the recognition that the semiotic ideology of radical “decentring” found in these texts masks the changing course of their actual pragmatic enactment.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.055
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sémiotiquesSame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207