MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098610041 · doi:10.1017/s0959774304000034

A Cognitive Typology for Numerical Notation

2004· article· en· W2098610041 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge Archaeological Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and cultural evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTypologyNotationLinguisticsEpistemologyDomesticationCognitionSociologyMathematicsPsychologyPhilosophyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The numerical notation associated with texts and other representational media used in ancient societies is an important means by which past cognitive processes may be reconstructed. No satisfactory typology exists, however, to help understand the relationship between numerical symbols and cognitive processes. As a result, theories concerning the development of numeration remain mired in a unilinear and ethnocentric framework in which our own (Hindu-Arabic or Western) numerals are seen as the ultimate stage of evolution. It is suggested herein that there are two separate dimensions that need to be considered when classifying and evaluating numerical notation systems, and that these dimensions are structured in highly constrained ways. A new typology is presented in which systems are classified into five major types on the basis of these dimensions. Using this typology, a multilinear model is presented for the patterned diachronic change in numerical notation systems, which refutes both unilinear evolutionary theories and radically relativistic propositions regarding how individuals in pre-modern societies represented numbers.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.312 · 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