MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085211651

Discourse in Flux.

2005· article· en· W2085211651 on OpenAlex
Anna Sfard

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueMind Culture and Activity · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoticePeriod (music)Quarter (Canadian coin)SociologyPhilosophyHistoryPolitical scienceLawAesthetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ArgumentumOrnithologicum.Iclosemyeyesandseeaflockofbirds.Thevisionlastsasecond,orperhapsless;IamnotsurehowmanybirdsIsaw.Wasthenumberofbirdsdefiniteorindefinite?TheprobleminvolvestheexistenceofGod.IfGodexists,thenumberisdefinite,becauseGodknowshowmany birds I saw. If God does not exist, then the number is indefinite, because no one can have counted. In thiscaseIsawfewerthantenbirds(letussay)andmorethanone,butdidnotseenine,eight,seven,six, five,four,threeortwobirds.Isawanumberbetweentenandone,whichwasnotnine,eight,seven,six, five, etc. That integer—not-nine, not-eight, not-seven, not-six, not-five, etc.—is inconceivable. Ergo, God exists. –Jorge Luis Borges (1960/1999, p. 299) More than 2 decades have passed since Geoffrey Saxe’s first visit to Papua New Guinea, when he began his inquiry into the highly idiosyncratic counting system of Oksapmin’s people. As evidenced by his account, a quarter of a century is a period long enough to make historical shifts visible.Thepointofdepartureforthiscommentaryon“CognitioninFlux”—orCiF,forshort—isthat what is true about the discourse under investigation may also be true about the discourse of the investigator: Over the years, the researcher’s talk might have undergone noticeable transformation as well. Because the recursive exercise of researching the discourse of research may be an experiencenotanylessinstructivethanfollowingchangesinindigenousOksapminarithmetic,Idecided to devote my critical appraisal of Saxe’s 25-year-old project to the analysis of shifts in his uses of thekeyworddevelopment.Indoingthis,IwillbefollowingtheexampleofSaxe’sownstudy,presented in this issue, in which he epitomized the development of Oksapmin numerical thinking in thestoryofasingleword—fu.Inthefollowing,whileconductingthishistoricalinquiry,ItrytoansweraquestionnotunliketheoneSaxeandEsmondehaveaskedwithrespecttoOksapminnumerical discourse: How do changes in the ways of talking result from, and impinge on, what people ask, do, and notice? 1 TheomnipresenceofthewordsdevelopmentanddevelopmentalinSaxe’swritingindicateshis adherence to the well-established line of research, the roots of which go many decades back, and which is strongly associated with the work of both Piaget and Vygotsky. The long tradition has madethekeynotionsofthedevelopmentalresearchseemsoself-evidentthatalmostnouserbothers to define them explicitly. (I challenge the reader to find an operative definition of the term de

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.296 · 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