MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111859700 · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v3i1.14004

Contextuality and Beyond: Investigating an Online Diary Corpus

2009· article· en· W2111859700 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Teddiman

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormalityCategorical variableMeasure (data warehouse)Word (group theory)Point (geometry)Natural language processingComputer scienceKochen–Specker theoremLinguisticsArtificial intelligencePsychologyMathematicsData miningMachine learningPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heylighen and Dewaele’s (2002) F-score, a measure of formality developed based on categorical frequencies of word types, is used as a starting point for an investigation of an online diary corpus. Comparisons are made between results in the main corpus of diary entries, a smaller corpus of diary comments, and with previously calculated F-scores for similar types of data (Nowson, Oberlander & Gill, 2005). While the overall F-score is similar in these two corpora, results show that internal make-up of the categories upon which the calculation is based can differ. This suggests that while the F-score is a good measure of formality/contextuality and is useful in distinguishing between genres on a large scale, more detailed analyses are required to more completely describe and situate genres with respect to one another.

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)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social MediaSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207