MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088917940 · doi:10.7202/602739ar

L’alternance C/Ø des verbes français : une analyse par contraintes et stratégies de réparation

2009· article· fr· W2088917940 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Carole Paradis, Fatimazohra El Fenne

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de linguistique · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’alternance C(onsonne)/Ø en français, notamment dans la flexion verbale, est souvent causée par des violations de contraintes phonologiques. Les consonnes latentes sont analysées ici comme des consonnes flottantes - des consonnes malformées en forme sous-jacente parce sans unité de temps - qui violent le « principe de légitimation » selon lequel toute unité phonologique doit être incorporée dans une structure complète. Selon le contexte phonologique/ morphologique, une violation peut être « réparée » par l’élision de la consonne flottante ou l’insertion d’une unité de temps, d’où résulte partiellement l’alternance C/Ø. Contrairement aux traditionnels groupes verbaux, la distinction entre « radical à consonne flottante » et « radical à consonne permanente » permet de prédire la sélection de suffixes infinitifs.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de linguistiqueSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207