Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantics is the meaning of symbols, notations, concepts, functions, and behaviors, as well as their relations that can be deduced onto a set of predefined entities and/or known concepts. Semantic computing is an emerging computational methodology that models and implements computational structures and behaviors at semantic or knowledge level beyond that of symbolic data. In semantic computing, formal semantics can be classified into the categories of to be, to have, and to do semantics. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of formal and cognitive semantics for semantic computing in the fields of computational linguistics, software science, computational intelligence, cognitive computing, and denotational mathematics. A set of novel formal semantics, such as deductive semantics, concept-algebra-based semantics, and visual semantics, is introduced that forms a theoretical and cognitive foundation for semantic computing. Applications of formal semantics in semantic computing are presented in case studies on semantic cognition of natural languages, semantic analyses of computing behaviors, behavioral semantics of human cognitive processes, and visual semantic algebra for image and visual object manipulations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".